linux-kernel - 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: <20090928154213.8e873dec.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 15:42:13 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	"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: Question: RCU stall detected in memcg  (Re: mmotm 2009-09-25-14-35
 uploaded

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
  [<ffffffff81131a00>] ? mem_cgroup_get_local_stat+0x0/0x110
  [<ffffffff81131d5b>] ? mem_control_stat_show+0x14b/0x330
  [<ffffffff810a57fd>] ? cgroup_seqfile_show+0x3d/0x60
  [<ffffffff810a5b90>] ? cgroup_map_add+0x0/0x30
  [<ffffffff8115de03>] ? seq_read+0xf3/0x420
  [<ffffffff811d9926>] ? security_file_permission+0x16/0x20
  [<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 ?

Thanks,
-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/