linux-kernel - Re: "rcu: React to callback overload by aggressively seeking quiescent states" hangs on boot

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191215202023.GM2889@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date:   Sun, 15 Dec 2019 12:20:23 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Dexuan-Linux Cui <dexuan.linux@...il.com>
Cc:     Qian Cai <cai@....pw>,
        "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lili Deng <Lili.Deng@...rosoft.com>,
        Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
        Baihua Lu <Baihua.Lu@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: "rcu: React to callback overload by aggressively seeking
 quiescent states" hangs on boot

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 11:18:43AM -0800, Dexuan-Linux Cui wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 10:41 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 06:11:16PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Dec 13, 2019, at 5:46 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am running this on a number of x86 systems, but will try it on a
> > >
> > > The config to reproduce includes several debugging options that might
> > > required to recreate.
> >
> > If you run without those debugging options, do you still see the hangs?
> > If not, please let me know which debugging are involved.
> >
> > > > wider variety.  If I cannot reproduce it, would you be willing to
> > > > run diagnostics?
> > >
> > > Yes.
> >
> > Very good!  Let me see what I can put together.  (No luck reproducing
> > at my end thus far.)
> >
> > > > Just to double-check...  Are you running rcutorture built into the kernel?
> > > > (My guess is "no", but figured that I should ask.)
> > >
> > > No as you can see from the config I linked in the original email.
> >
> > Fair point, and please accept my apologies for the pointless question.
> >
> >                                                         Thanx, Paul
> 
> Hi,
> We're seeing the same hang issue with a recent Linux next-20191213
> kernel.  If we revert the same commit 82150cb53dcb ("rcu: React to
> callback overload by aggressively seeking quiescent states”), the
> issue will go away.
> 
> Note: we're running the x86-64 Linux VM Hyper-V, and the the torture
> test is not used:
> 
> $ grep  -i torture  .config
> CONFIG_LOCK_TORTURE_TEST=m
> CONFIG_TORTURE_TEST=m
> # CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST is not set
> 
> (FYI: the kernel config and the serial console log are attached).
> 
> When the issue happens, I force a kernel panic by NMI several times
> and I can see the rcu_gp_kthread hangs at some places, but it looks
> all the places are in the below loop:
> 
> (The first panic log is in the attachment)
> (gdb) l *(rcu_gp_kthread+0x703)
> 0xffffffff811128c3 is in rcu_gp_kthread (kernel/rcu/tree.c:1763).
> 1758                    if (rnp == rdp->mynode)
> 1759                            needgp = __note_gp_changes(rnp, rdp) || needgp;
> 1760                    /* smp_mb() provided by prior unlock-lock pair. */
> 1761                    needgp = rcu_future_gp_cleanup(rnp) || needgp;
> 1762                    // Reset overload indication for CPUs no
> longer overloaded
> 1763                    for_each_leaf_node_cpu_mask(rnp, cpu, rnp->cbovldmask) {
> 1764                            rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu);
> 1765                            check_cb_ovld_locked(rdp, rnp);
> 1766                    }
> 1767                    sq = rcu_nocb_gp_get(rnp);

This is consistent with what I saw in Qian Cai's report, FYI.  So I
am very interested in learning whether the first patch in my reply [1]
helps you.

							Thanx, Paul

[1]  https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191215201646.GK2889@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72/