[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160616025800.GO17127@bbox>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:58:00 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
John Einar Reitan <john.reitan@...s.arm.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@...fitbricks.com>,
Chan Gyun Jeong <chan.jeong@....com>,
Sangseok Lee <sangseok.lee@....com>,
Kyeongdon Kim <kyeongdon.kim@....com>,
Chulmin Kim <cmlaika.kim@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/12] Support non-lru page migration
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:48:27AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On (06/16/16 08:12), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > [ 315.146533] kasan: CONFIG_KASAN_INLINE enabled
> > > [ 315.146538] kasan: GPF could be caused by NULL-ptr deref or user memory access
> > > [ 315.146546] general protection fault: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
> > > [ 315.146576] Modules linked in: lzo zram zsmalloc mousedev coretemp hwmon crc32c_intel r8169 i2c_i801 mii snd_hda_codec_realtek snd_hda_codec_generic snd_hda_intel snd_hda_codec snd_hda_core acpi_cpufreq snd_pcm snd_timer snd soundcore lpc_ich mfd_core processor sch_fq_codel sd_mod hid_generic usbhid hid ahci libahci libata ehci_pci ehci_hcd scsi_mod usbcore usb_common
> > > [ 315.146785] CPU: 3 PID: 38 Comm: khugepaged Not tainted 4.7.0-rc3-next-20160614-dbg-00004-ga1c2cbc-dirty #488
> > > [ 315.146841] task: ffff8800bfaf2900 ti: ffff880112468000 task.ti: ffff880112468000
> > > [ 315.146859] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffffa02c413d>] [<ffffffffa02c413d>] zs_page_migrate+0x355/0xaa0 [zsmalloc]
> >
> > Thanks for the report!
> >
> > zs_page_migrate+0x355? Could you tell me what line is it?
> >
> > It seems to be related to obj_to_head.
>
> reproduced. a bit different call stack this time. but the problem is
> still the same.
>
> zs_compact()
> ...
> 6371: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 6376 <zs_compact+0x22b>
> 6376: 0f 0b ud2
> 6378: 48 8b 95 a8 fe ff ff mov -0x158(%rbp),%rdx
> 637f: 4d 8d 74 24 78 lea 0x78(%r12),%r14
> 6384: 4c 89 ee mov %r13,%rsi
> 6387: 4c 89 e7 mov %r12,%rdi
> 638a: e8 86 c7 ff ff callq 2b15 <get_first_obj_offset>
> 638f: 41 89 c5 mov %eax,%r13d
> 6392: 4c 89 f0 mov %r14,%rax
> 6395: 48 c1 e8 03 shr $0x3,%rax
> 6399: 8a 04 18 mov (%rax,%rbx,1),%al
> 639c: 84 c0 test %al,%al
> 639e: 0f 85 f2 02 00 00 jne 6696 <zs_compact+0x54b>
> 63a4: 41 8b 44 24 78 mov 0x78(%r12),%eax
> 63a9: 41 0f af c7 imul %r15d,%eax
> 63ad: 41 01 c5 add %eax,%r13d
> 63b0: 4c 89 f0 mov %r14,%rax
> 63b3: 48 c1 e8 03 shr $0x3,%rax
> 63b7: 48 01 d8 add %rbx,%rax
> 63ba: 48 89 85 88 fe ff ff mov %rax,-0x178(%rbp)
> 63c1: 41 81 fd ff 0f 00 00 cmp $0xfff,%r13d
> 63c8: 0f 87 1a 03 00 00 ja 66e8 <zs_compact+0x59d>
> 63ce: 49 63 f5 movslq %r13d,%rsi
> 63d1: 48 03 b5 98 fe ff ff add -0x168(%rbp),%rsi
> 63d8: 48 8b bd a8 fe ff ff mov -0x158(%rbp),%rdi
> 63df: e8 67 d9 ff ff callq 3d4b <obj_to_head>
> 63e4: a8 01 test $0x1,%al
> 63e6: 0f 84 d9 02 00 00 je 66c5 <zs_compact+0x57a>
> 63ec: 48 83 e0 fe and $0xfffffffffffffffe,%rax
> 63f0: bf 01 00 00 00 mov $0x1,%edi
> 63f5: 48 89 85 b0 fe ff ff mov %rax,-0x150(%rbp)
> 63fc: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 6401 <zs_compact+0x2b6>
> 6401: 48 8b 85 b0 fe ff ff mov -0x150(%rbp),%rax
RAX: 2065676162726166 so rax is totally garbage, I think.
It means obj_to_head returns garbage because get_first_obj_offset is
utter crab because (page_idx / class->pages_per_zspage) was totally
wrong.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 6408: f0 0f ba 28 00 lock btsl $0x0,(%rax)
<snip>
> > Could you test with [zsmalloc: keep first object offset in struct page]
> > in mmotm?
>
> sure, I can. will it help, tho? we have a race condition here I think.
I guess root cause is caused by get_first_obj_offset.
Please test with it.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists