| 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: <20200526152120.GD48741@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 18:21:20 +0300
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
elver@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de, paulmck@...nel.org,
mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/18] sparc32: mm: Reduce allocation size for PMD and
PTE tables
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:01:27PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 02:26:35PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 03:32:56PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 04:02:11PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On 5/20/20 12:51 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 12:03:31PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > >> With above patch applied on top of Ira's patch, I get:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, S01syslogd/139
> > > > >> lock: 0xf5448350, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: S01syslogd/139, .owner_cpu: 0
> > > > >> CPU: 0 PID: 139 Comm: S01syslogd Not tainted 5.7.0-rc6-next-20200518-00002-gb178d2d56f29-dirty #1
> > > > >> [f0067a64 :
> > > > >> do_raw_spin_lock+0xa8/0xd8 ]
> > > > >> [f00d5034 :
> > > > >> copy_page_range+0x328/0x804 ]
> > > > >> [f0025be4 :
> > > > >> dup_mm+0x334/0x434 ]
> > > > >> [f0027124 :
> > > > >> copy_process+0x1224/0x12b0 ]
> > > > >> [f0027344 :
> > > > >> _do_fork+0x54/0x30c ]
> > > > >> [f0027670 :
> > > > >> do_fork+0x5c/0x6c ]
> > > > >> [f000de44 :
> > > > >> sparc_do_fork+0x18/0x38 ]
> > > > >> [f000b7f4 :
> > > > >> do_syscall+0x34/0x40 ]
> > > > >> [5010cd4c :
> > > > >> 0x5010cd4c ]
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Looks like yet another problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've checked the patch above on top of the mmots which already has Ira's
> > > > > patches and it booted fine. I've used sparc32_defconfig to build the
> > > > > kernel and qemu-system-sparc with default machine and CPU.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Try sparc32_defconfig+SMP.
> > >
> > > I see a differernt problem, but this could be related:
> > >
> > > INIT: version 2.86 booting
> > > rcu: INFO: rcu_sched detected stalls on CPUs/tasks:
> > > (detected by 0, t=5252 jiffies, g=-935, q=3)
> > > rcu: All QSes seen, last rcu_sched kthread activity 5252 (-68674--73926), jiffies_till_next_fqs=1, root ->qsmask 0x0
> > > rcu: rcu_sched kthread starved for 5252 jiffies! g-935 f0x2 RCU_GP_WAIT_FQS(5) ->state=0x0 ->cpu=0
> > > rcu: Unless rcu_sched kthread gets sufficient CPU time, OOM is now expected behavior.
> > > rcu: RCU grace-period kthread stack dump:
> > > rcu_sched R running task 0 10 2 0x00000000
> > >
> > > I'm running a bit old debian [1] with qemu-img-sparc.
> > >
> > > My bisect pointed at commit 8c8f3156dd40 ("sparc32: mm: Reduce
> > > allocation size for PMD and PTE tables"). The commit ID is valid for
> > > next-20200522.
> >
> > Can you try the diff below please?
>
> Actually, that's racy. New version below!
Well, both versions worked for me with sparc32_defconfig+SMP build when
I ran qemu-system-sparc with default machine (SS-5) that does not allow
SMP.
I could not check with actial SMP because
qemu-system-sparc -M SS-10 -smp 2 and qemu-system-sparc -M SS-20 -smp 2
fail early with an exception even in v5.7-rc7...
> Will
>
> --->8
>
> diff --git a/arch/sparc/mm/srmmu.c b/arch/sparc/mm/srmmu.c
> index c861c0f0df73..068029471aa4 100644
> --- a/arch/sparc/mm/srmmu.c
> +++ b/arch/sparc/mm/srmmu.c
> @@ -363,11 +363,16 @@ pgtable_t pte_alloc_one(struct mm_struct *mm)
>
> if ((ptep = pte_alloc_one_kernel(mm)) == 0)
> return NULL;
> +
> page = pfn_to_page(__nocache_pa((unsigned long)ptep) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> - if (!pgtable_pte_page_ctor(page)) {
> - __free_page(page);
> - return NULL;
> +
> + spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> + if (page_ref_inc_return(page) == 2 && !pgtable_pte_page_ctor(page)) {
> + page_ref_dec(page);
> + ptep = NULL;
> }
> + spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> +
> return ptep;
> }
>
> @@ -376,7 +381,12 @@ void pte_free(struct mm_struct *mm, pgtable_t ptep)
> struct page *page;
>
> page = pfn_to_page(__nocache_pa((unsigned long)ptep) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> - pgtable_pte_page_dtor(page);
> +
> + spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> + if (page_ref_dec_return(page) == 1)
> + pgtable_pte_page_dtor(page);
> + spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> +
> srmmu_free_nocache(ptep, SRMMU_PTE_TABLE_SIZE);
> }
>
> diff --git a/mm/Kconfig b/mm/Kconfig
> index c1acc34c1c35..97458119cce8 100644
> --- a/mm/Kconfig
> +++ b/mm/Kconfig
> @@ -192,6 +192,9 @@ config MEMORY_HOTREMOVE
> # Default to 4 for wider testing, though 8 might be more appropriate.
> # ARM's adjust_pte (unused if VIPT) depends on mm-wide page_table_lock.
> # PA-RISC 7xxx's spinlock_t would enlarge struct page from 32 to 44 bytes.
> +# SPARC32 allocates multiple pte tables within a single page, and therefore
> +# a per-page lock leads to problems when multiple tables need to be locked
> +# at the same time (e.g. copy_page_range()).
> # DEBUG_SPINLOCK and DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC spinlock_t also enlarge struct page.
> #
> config SPLIT_PTLOCK_CPUS
> @@ -199,6 +202,7 @@ config SPLIT_PTLOCK_CPUS
> default "999999" if !MMU
> default "999999" if ARM && !CPU_CACHE_VIPT
> default "999999" if PARISC && !PA20
> + default "999999" if SPARC32
> default "4"
>
> config ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists