| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <AANLkTimVu+5gTDs8przJVP2EbWC=FX-zWW7aH08BtrHC@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 12:06:21 +0200 From: Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@...glemail.com> To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Li Shaohua <shaohua.li@...el.com> Subject: Re: Deadlock possibly caused by too_many_isolated. On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@...glemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 1:11 AM, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> wrote: >> Yes, thanks for the report. >> This is a real bug exactly as you describe. >> >> This is how I think I will fix it, though it needs a bit of review and >> testing before I can be certain. >> Also I need to check raid10 etc to see if they can suffer too. >> >> If you can test it I would really appreciate it. > > I did test it, but while it seemed to fix the deadlock, the system > still got unusable. > The still running "vmstat 1" showed that the swapout was still > progressing, but at a rate of ~20k sized bursts every 5 to 20 seconds. > > I also tried to additionally add Wu's patch: > --- linux-next.orig/mm/vmscan.c 2010-10-13 12:35:14.000000000 +0800 > +++ linux-next/mm/vmscan.c 2010-10-19 00:13:04.000000000 +0800 > @@ -1163,6 +1163,13 @@ static int too_many_isolated(struct zone > isolated = zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON); > } > > + /* > + * GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS callers are allowed to isolate more pages, so that > + * they won't get blocked by normal ones and form circular deadlock. > + */ > + if ((sc->gfp_mask & GFP_IOFS) == GFP_IOFS) > + inactive >>= 3; > + > return isolated > inactive; > > Either it did help somewhat, or I was more lucky on my second try, but > this time I needed ~5 tries instead of only 2 to get the system mostly > stuck again. On the testrun with Wu's patch the writeout pattern was > more stable, a burst of ~80kb each 20 seconds. But I would suspect > that the size of the burst is rather random. > > I do have a complete SysRq+T dump from the first run, I can send that > to anyone how wants it. > (It's 190k so I don't want not spam it to the list) Is this call trace from the SysRq+T violation the rule to only allocate one bio from bio_alloc() until its submitted? [ 549.700038] Call Trace: [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81566b54>] schedule_timeout+0x144/0x200 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81045cd0>] ? process_timeout+0x0/0x10 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81565e22>] io_schedule_timeout+0x42/0x60 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81083123>] mempool_alloc+0x163/0x1b0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81053560>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810ea2b9>] bio_alloc_bioset+0x39/0xf0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810ea38d>] bio_clone+0x1d/0x50 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff814318ed>] make_request+0x23d/0x850 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81082e20>] ? mempool_alloc_slab+0x10/0x20 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81045cd0>] ? process_timeout+0x0/0x10 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81436e63>] md_make_request+0xc3/0x220 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81083099>] ? mempool_alloc+0xd9/0x1b0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff811ec153>] generic_make_request+0x1b3/0x370 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810ea2d6>] ? bio_alloc_bioset+0x56/0xf0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff811ec36a>] submit_bio+0x5a/0xd0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81080cf5>] ? unlock_page+0x25/0x30 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810a871e>] swap_writepage+0x7e/0xc0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81090d99>] shmem_writepage+0x1c9/0x240 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8108c9cb>] pageout+0x11b/0x270 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8108cd78>] shrink_page_list+0x258/0x4d0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8108d9e7>] shrink_inactive_list+0x187/0x310 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8102dcb1>] ? __wake_up_common+0x51/0x80 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff811fc8b2>] ? cpumask_next_and+0x22/0x40 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8108e1c0>] shrink_zone+0x3e0/0x470 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8108e797>] try_to_free_pages+0x157/0x410 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81087c92>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x412/0x760 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810b27d6>] alloc_pages_current+0x76/0xe0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810b6dad>] new_slab+0x1fd/0x2a0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81045cd0>] ? process_timeout+0x0/0x10 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810b8721>] __slab_alloc+0x111/0x540 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81059961>] ? prepare_creds+0x21/0xb0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff810b92bb>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x9b/0xa0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff81059961>] prepare_creds+0x21/0xb0 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8104a919>] sys_setresgid+0x29/0x120 [ 549.700038] [<ffffffff8100242b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b [ 549.700038] ffff88011e125ea8 0000000000000046 ffff88011e125e08 ffffffff81073c59 [ 549.700038] 0000000000012780 ffff88011ea905b0 ffff88011ea90808 ffff88011e125fd8 [ 549.700038] ffff88011ea90810 ffff88011e124010 0000000000012780 ffff88011e125fd8 swap_writepage() uses get_swap_bio() which uses bio_alloc() to get one bio. That bio is the submitted, but the submit path seems to get into make_request from raid1.c and that allocates a second bio from bio_alloc() via bio_clone(). I am seeing this pattern (swap_writepage calling md_make_request/make_request and then getting stuck in mempool_alloc) more than 5 times in the SysRq+T output... Torsten -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists