linux-kernel - Re: Question: RCU stall detected in memcg (Re: mmotm 2009-09-25-14-35 uploaded

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a9f68c7bb7c34f435b59e57e70339786.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:30:01 +0900 (JST)
From:	"KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	"KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	mingo@...e.hu,
	"balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: Question: RCU stall detected in memcg  (Re: mmotm
 2009-09-25-14-35 uploaded

Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 03:42:13PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:35:46 -0700
>> akpm@...ux-foundation.org wrote:
>>
>> > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2009-09-25-14-35 has been uploaded to
>> >
>> >    http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/
>> >
>> > and will soon be available at
>> >
>> >    git://git.zen-sources.org/zen/mmotm.git
>> >
>> > It contains the following patches against 2.6.31:
>> >
>>
>> At testing my (small) patch, with high memory pressure to
>> memcg+hierarchy+softlimit, following is shown.
>> ==
>> INFO: RCU detected CPU 0 stall (t=10000 jiffies)
>> sending NMI to all CPUs:
>> NMI backtrace for cpu 0
>> CPU 0:
>> Modules linked in: sco bridge stp bnep l2cap crc16 bluetooth rfkill
>> iptabl
>> e_filter ip_tables ip6table_filter ip6_tables x_tables ipv6
>> cpufreq_ondemand acpi_cpufreq dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log d
>> m_multipath dm_mod uinput ppdev i2c_i801 pcspkr i2c_core bnx2 sg e1000e
>> parport_pc parport button shpchp megaraid_sas sd_mo
>> d scsi_mod ext3 jbd uhci_hcd ohci_hcd ehci_hcd [last unloaded:
>> microcode]
>>  Pid: 2886, comm: ruby Not tainted 2.6.31-mm1 #2 PRIMERGY
>>  RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff810878fe>]  [<ffffffff810878fe>]
>> trace_hardirqs_off_ca
>> ller+0x3e/0xb RSP: 0018:ffff88004fa03d98  EFLAGS: 00000006
>>  RAX: 0000000000000046 RBX: 0000000000000c00 RCX: 000000000000e501
>>  RDX: ffff8806133564f0 RSI: 0000000000000002 RDI: ffffffff8102a940
>>  RBP: ffff88004fa03d98 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000
>>  R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000002
>>  R13: 0000000000000046 R14: 00000000000000ff R15: ffff88004fa03f48
>>  FS:  00007fdeca0856f0(0000) GS:ffff88004fa00000(0000)
>> knlGS:0000000000000000
>>  CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
>>  CR2: 00007fdeca09e000 CR3: 0000000619fc6000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
>>  DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
>>  DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
>>  Call Trace:
>>   <#DB[1]>  <<EOE>> Pid: 2886, comm: ruby Not tainted 2.6.31-mm1 #2
>>  Call Trace:
>>   <NMI>  [<ffffffff8100af79>] ? show_regs+0x49/0x50
>>   [<ffffffff81429385>] nmi_watchdog_tick+0x1e5/0x210
>>   [<ffffffff81428891>] do_nmi+0x1b1/0x2e0
>>   [<ffffffff8142808a>] nmi+0x1a/0x2c
>>   [<ffffffff8102a940>] ? flat_send_IPI_mask+0x90/0xb0
>>   [<ffffffff810878fe>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x3e/0xb0
>>   <<EOE>>  <IRQ>  [<ffffffff810884bd>] trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
>>   [<ffffffff8102a940>] flat_send_IPI_mask+0x90/0xb0
>>   [<ffffffff8102a9c9>] flat_send_IPI_all+0x69/0x70
>>   [<ffffffff81027372>] arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace+0x62/0xa0
>>   [<ffffffff810bff8e>] __rcu_pending+0x7e/0x370
>>   [<ffffffff810c02c7>] rcu_check_callbacks+0x47/0x130
>>   [<ffffffff81063a26>] update_process_times+0x46/0x70
>>   [<ffffffff81085930>] tick_sched_timer+0x60/0x160
>>   [<ffffffff810858d0>] ? tick_sched_timer+0x0/0x160
>>   [<ffffffff8107a03a>] __run_hrtimer+0xba/0x150
>>   [<ffffffff8107a325>] hrtimer_interrupt+0xd5/0x1b0
>>   [<ffffffff81426dfe>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x3a/0x3c
>>   [<ffffffff8142cacd>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x6d/0x9b
>>   [<ffffffff8100cb33>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x13/0x20
>>   <EOI>  [<ffffffff811317b6>] ? mem_cgroup_walk_tree+0x156/0x180
>>   [<ffffffff811316d3>] ? mem_cgroup_walk_tree+0x73/0x180
>>   [<ffffffff81131692>] ? mem_cgroup_walk_tree+0x32/0x180
>
> mem_cgroup_walk_tree() does have a loop.  Not sure why it is showing
> up on the stack twice.  But it might well be the culprit.  Also,
> it repeatedly calls css_get_next(), which acquires ss->id_lock.
> If some other CPU is holding this lock too long, or failed to release
> it, then we could see a stall spinning on the lock.  (Though these
> sorts of problems are often caught by other diagnostics.)
>
Thanks. I found above stack trace is in css_tryget() which has a loop.
It loops forever if css->refcnt is 0. Then, I doubt refcnt-miss in css.



>>   [<ffffffff81131a00>] ? mem_cgroup_get_local_stat+0x0/0x110
>
> mem_cgroup_get_local_stat() is straight-line code, so should not be
> the problem.
>
>>   [<ffffffff81131d5b>] ? mem_control_stat_show+0x14b/0x330
>
> mem_control_stat_show() has a pair of fixed-iteration loops, so
> should not be the problem.
>
>>   [<ffffffff810a57fd>] ? cgroup_seqfile_show+0x3d/0x60
>
> Straight-line code, should not be a problem.
>
>>   [<ffffffff810a5b90>] ? cgroup_map_add+0x0/0x30
>
> Straight-line code, should not be a problem.
>
>>   [<ffffffff8115de03>] ? seq_read+0xf3/0x420
>
> I suppose that seq_read() could be repeatedly getting -EAGAIN out of
> traverse(), but unless I am missing something, we would be seeing a
> different stack trace in that case.
>
>>   [<ffffffff811d9926>] ? security_file_permission+0x16/0x20
>
> ... and so on ...
>
>>   [<ffffffff8113b7ec>] ? vfs_read+0xcc/0x190
>>   [<ffffffff8113b9b5>] ? sys_read+0x55/0x90
>>   [<ffffffff8100bf9b>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>> .....
>> ==
>> mem_cgroup_walk_tree() is not very young function and I've been doing
>> the
>> same kind of tests but this is 1st messeage for me. So, I'm a bit
>> confused.
>> and not sure how I start debug from...
>>
>> Does this mean mem_cgroup_walk_tree() blocks RCU's progress
>> over 10000 jiffies ? What should I doubt ?
>
> It means that this CPU has indeed been blocking RCU's progress for more
> than 10 seconds (10,000 jiffies if HZ==1000).  One thing would be to
> wait for another 30 seconds and see if you get another stall warning.
> If not, then you could try decreasing RCU_SECONDS_TILL_STALL_RECHECK to
> (say) 5*HZ.
>
I saw twice in the same place. Thanks. I now doubt memcg's code.

> Either way, if you get two stack traces during the same CPU-stall event,
> it can give you a much better idea where in the callstack the stall is
> actually occurring.
>

Thank you for your advices :)
I'll review and add bug-check codes in memcg more.

Regards,
-Kame


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/