linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][RT][PATCH RESEND] mm: Do not use stop_machine() for __zone_pcp_udpate() for CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1362511312.31874.34.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date:	Tue, 05 Mar 2013 14:21:52 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Aaditya Kumar <aaditya.kumar.30@...il.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	frank.rowand@...sony.com, tim.bird@...sony.com,
	jamshed.a@...sony.com, takuzo.ohara@...sony.com,
	amit.agarwal@...sony.com, kan.iibuchi@...sony.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][RT][PATCH RESEND] mm: Do not use stop_machine() for
 __zone_pcp_udpate() for CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL

On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 00:10 +0530, Aaditya Kumar wrote:
> The code path of __zone_pcp_update() has following locks, which in
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL=y are rt-mutex.
>   - pa_lock locked by cpu_lock_irqsave()
>   - zone->lock locked by free_pcppages_bulk()
> 
> Since __zone_pcp_update() is called from stop_machine(), so with
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL=y
> we get following backtrace when __zone_pcp_update() is called during
> memory hot plugging while
> doing heavy file I/O.
> 
> stop_machine() may not be required for calling __zone_pcp_update()

"may not be required" is not a technical sufficient reason for a change.

Why is this called from stop_machine() in mainline, and what exactly
makes it "OK" to not use it in PREEMPT_RT? Just because the routine uses
mutexes doesn't mean that its safe.

Actually, spinlocks are meaningless when used in stop_machine(), thus a
question can be made, why is it taking spinlocks in a stop_machine()
routine in the first place. As stop_machine() will stop all other CPUs
from running there should not be any need for spinlocks. Is it just
because it's using routines that are used in normal operations?

Note, stop_machine() synchronizes things outside of locks. Which means
if it's needed for mainline it is most likely needed for PREEMPT_RT as
well.

The real solution is to figure out why stop_machine() is required in the
first place, and remove it completely if possible. Both from PREEMPT_RT
*and* mainline!

-- Steve

> in case of CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL=y as acquiring pa_lock in __zone_pcp_update()
> should be sufficient to isolate pcp pages and to setup per cpu pagesets.
> 
> 
> The backtrace that this patch fixes:
>  BUG: scheduling while atomic: migration/0/7/0x00000002
>  Modules linked in: v2p
>  Backtrace:
>  [<800111a0>] (dump_backtrace+0x0/0x10c) from [<802d7b7c>]
> (dump_stack+0x18/0x1c)
>   r6:80c8fc28 r5:80c8f9a0 r4:00000000 r3:60000013
>  [<802d7b64>] (dump_stack+0x0/0x1c) from [<8001e81c>] (__schedule_bug+0x64/0x74)
>  [<8001e7b8>] (__schedule_bug+0x0/0x74) from [<802d7fa0>]
> (__schedule+0x68/0x604)
>   r4:8051bf00 r3:00000000
>  [<802d7f38>] (__schedule+0x0/0x604) from [<802d8a78>] (schedule+0x98/0xbc)
>  [<802d89e0>] (schedule+0x0/0xbc) from [<802d9e14>]
> (rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x168/0x240)
>   r4:805228f4 r3:00000000
>  [<802d9cac>] (rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x0/0x240) from [<802da234>]
> (rt_spin_lock+0x10/0x14)
>  [<802da224>] (rt_spin_lock+0x0/0x14) from [<8008694c>]
> (__zone_pcp_update+0x58/0xd8)
>  [<800868f4>] (__zone_pcp_update+0x0/0xd8) from [<800603ec>]
> (stop_machine_cpu_stop+0xb0/0x104)
>  [<8006033c>] (stop_machine_cpu_stop+0x0/0x104) from [<80060200>]
> (cpu_stopper_thread+0xd4/0x188)
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aaditya Kumar <aaditya.kumar@...sony.com>
> 
> ---
>  mm/page_alloc.c |    4         4 +     0 -     0 !
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: b/mm/page_alloc.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3868,7 +3868,11 @@ static int __zone_pcp_update(void *data)
> 
>  void zone_pcp_update(struct zone *zone)
>  {
> +#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL
>         stop_machine(__zone_pcp_update, zone, NULL);
> +#else
> +       __zone_pcp_update(zone);
> +#endif
>  }
> 
>  static __meminit void zone_pcp_init(struct zone *zone)


--
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/