From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
arjan@infradead.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: Buggy IPI and MTRR code on low memory
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:12:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090128131202.21757da6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901281029150.25359@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:38:14 -0500 (EST)
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> While developing the RT git tree I came across this deadlock.
>
> To avoid touching the memory allocator in smp_call_function_many I forced
> the stack use case, the path that would be taken if data fails to
> allocate.
>
> Here's the current code in kernel/smp.c:
>
> void smp_call_function_many(const struct cpumask *mask,
> void (*func)(void *), void *info,
> bool wait)
> {
> struct call_function_data *data;
> [...]
> data = kmalloc(sizeof(*data) + cpumask_size(), GFP_ATOMIC);
> if (unlikely(!data)) {
> /* Slow path. */
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> if (cpu == smp_processor_id())
> continue;
> if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, mask))
> smp_call_function_single(cpu, func, info,
> wait);
> }
> return;
> }
> [...]
>
> int smp_call_function_single(int cpu, void (*func) (void *info), void
> *info,
> int wait)
> {
> struct call_single_data d;
> [...]
> if (!wait) {
> data = kmalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_ATOMIC);
> if (data)
> data->flags = CSD_FLAG_ALLOC;
> }
> if (!data) {
> data = &d;
> data->flags = CSD_FLAG_WAIT;
> }
>
> Note that if data failed to allocate, we force the wait state.
>
>
> This immediately caused a deadlock with the mtrr code:
>
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/main.c:
>
> static void set_mtrr(unsigned int reg, unsigned long base,
> unsigned long size, mtrr_type type)
> {
> struct set_mtrr_data data;
> [...]
> /* Start the ball rolling on other CPUs */
> if (smp_call_function(ipi_handler, &data, 0) != 0)
> panic("mtrr: timed out waiting for other CPUs\n");
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
>
> while(atomic_read(&data.count))
> cpu_relax();
>
> /* ok, reset count and toggle gate */
> atomic_set(&data.count, num_booting_cpus() - 1);
> smp_wmb();
> atomic_set(&data.gate,1);
>
> [...]
>
> static void ipi_handler(void *info)
> /* [SUMMARY] Synchronisation handler. Executed by "other" CPUs.
> [RETURNS] Nothing.
> */
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> struct set_mtrr_data *data = info;
> unsigned long flags;
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
>
> atomic_dec(&data->count);
> while(!atomic_read(&data->gate))
> cpu_relax();
>
>
> The problem is that if we use the stack, then we must wait for the
> function to finish. But in the mtrr code, the called functions are waiting
> for the caller to do something after the smp_call_function. Thus we
> deadlock! This mtrr code seems to have been there for a while. At least
> longer than the git history.
My initial reaction is that the mtrr code is being stupid, but I guess
that strengthening the smp_call_function() stuff is good, and we _do_
have this "wait=0" contract.
> To get around this, I did the following hack. Now this may be good
> enough to handle the case. I'm posting it for comments.
>
> The patch creates another flag called CSD_FLAG_RELEASE. If we fail
> to alloc the data and the wait bit is not set, we still use the stack
> but we also set this flag instead of the wait flag. The receiving IPI
> will copy the data locally, and if this flag is set, it will clear it. The
> caller, after sending the IPI, will wait on this flag to be cleared.
>
> The difference between this and the wait bit is that the release bit is
> just a way to let the callee tell the caller that it copied the data and
> is continuing. The data can be released with no worries. This prevents the
> deadlock because the caller can continue without waiting for the functions
> to be called.
>
> I tested this patch by forcing the data to be null:
>
> data = NULL; // kmalloc(...);
>
> Also, when forcing data to be NULL on the latest git tree, without
> applying the patch, I hit a deadlock in testing of the NMI watchdog. This
> means there may be other areas in the kernel that think smp_call_function,
> without the wait bit set, expects that function not to ever wait.
Concern 1: do all architectures actually call
generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt()? I don't think they
_have_ to at present, and if they don't, we now have inconsistent
behaviour between architectures.
Concern 2: not all architectures set CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS=y.
Those which do not set CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS might need to
have similar changes made so that the behaviour remains consistent
across architectures.
Thought: do we need to do the kmalloc at all? Perhaps we can instead
use a statically allocated per-cpu call_single_data local to
kernel/smp.c? It would need a spinlock or something to protect it...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-28 21:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-28 16:38 Buggy IPI and MTRR code on low memory Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 16:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 16:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-28 16:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 17:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-28 17:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 18:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-28 18:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 18:22 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-01-28 18:34 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 21:12 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-01-28 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 21:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 22:07 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 22:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 23:20 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 23:50 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-28 23:25 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-28 23:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 0:52 ` [PATCH] use per cpu data for single cpu ipi calls Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 1:30 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 1:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 8:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 11:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-29 11:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 13:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-29 14:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 15:08 ` [PATCH -v2] " Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 15:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 16:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-29 17:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 17:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 17:50 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 18:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 18:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 18:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-29 18:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 18:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 11:23 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 12:32 ` [PATCH -v3] " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 12:38 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 12:55 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 12:56 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-30 13:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 13:02 ` [PATCH -v4] " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 14:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-30 16:04 ` [PATCH -v3] " Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 16:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-31 8:44 ` Jens Axboe
2009-01-29 18:49 ` [PATCH -v2] " Ingo Molnar
2009-01-30 1:55 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-29 17:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 17:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-29 18:08 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-01-30 1:11 ` Rusty Russell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090128131202.21757da6.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox