[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190515152415.lcbnqvcjppype7i5@pc636>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 17:24:15 +0200
From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...ymobile.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mm/vmap: keep track of free blocks for vmap
allocation
Hello, Andrew.
> An earlier version of this patch was accused of crashing the kernel:
>
> https://lists.01.org/pipermail/lkp/2019-April/010004.html
>
> does the v4 series address this?
I tried before to narrow down that crash but i did not succeed, so
i have never seen that before on my test environment as well as
during running lkp-tests including trinity test case:
test-url: http://codemonkey.org.uk/projects/trinity/
But after analysis of the Call-trace and slob_alloc():
<snip>
[ 0.395722] Call Trace:
[ 0.395722] slob_alloc+0x1c9/0x240
[ 0.395722] kmem_cache_alloc+0x70/0x80
[ 0.395722] acpi_ps_alloc_op+0xc0/0xca
[ 0.395722] acpi_ps_get_next_arg+0x3fa/0x6ed
<snip>
<snip>
/* Attempt to alloc */
prev = sp->lru.prev;
b = slob_page_alloc(sp, size, align);
if (!b)
continue;
/* Improve fragment distribution and reduce our average
* search time by starting our next search here. (see
* Knuth vol 1, sec 2.5, pg 449) */
if (prev != slob_list->prev &&
slob_list->next != prev->next)
list_move_tail(slob_list, prev->next); <- Crash is here in __list_add_valid()
break;
}
<snip>
i see that it tries to manipulate with "prev" node that may be removed
from the list by slob_page_alloc() earlier if whole page is used. I think
that crash has to be fixed by the below commit:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/mm-commits/msg137923.html
it was introduced into 5.1-rc3 kernel.
Why ("mm/vmalloc.c: keep track of free blocks for vmap allocation")
was accused is probably because it uses "kmem cache allocations with struct alignment"
instead of kmalloc()/kzalloc(). Maybe because of bigger size requests
it became easier to trigger the BUG. But that is theory.
--
Vlad Rezki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists