Message-ID: <CAOnJCUJ5h+A3Rk8anj7dakSY_3CbpmZb4YOoD849ocUCeTFvmA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jun 2020 11:08:55 -0700
From:   Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc:     Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>, shorne@...il.com,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Topel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: mm lock issue while booting Linux on 5.8-rc1 for RISC-V

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:07 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 10:54:51 PDT (-0700), atishp@...shpatra.org wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 3:45 AM Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I am also unable to reproduce the issue so far.
> >>
> >> I wanted to point to a few things in case this helps:
> >> - Commit 42fc541404f2 was bisected as the cause. This commit changes
> >> walk_page_range_novma() to use mmap_assert_locked() instead of
> >> lockdep_assert_held()
> >> - mmap_assert_locked() checks lockdep_assert_held(), but also checks
> >> that the rwsem itself is locked.
> >>
> >> Now how could lockdep think the lock is held, but the lock itself is
> >> not marked as locked ???
> >>
> >> I'm not sure if it helps at all, but a few commits earlier,
> >> 0cc55a0213a0 introduces mmap_read_trylock_non_owner(), which is used
> >> exclusively by stackmap, and does the opposite: it acquires the mmap
> >> lock without telling lockdep about it. I can't see any smoking gun
> >> linking this to our bug, but I thought it may be worth mentioning as
> >> it involves the same suspects (stackmap and the difference between
> >> owning the lock vs lockdep thinking we own the lock).
> >>
> >> I'm sorry, that's only how far I was able to go on this bug - I'm not
> >> sure how to investigate it further as I can not reproduce the issue...
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 1:40 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:51:08 PDT (-0700), shorne@...il.com wrote:
> >> > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 06:57:47AM +0900, Stafford Horne wrote:
> >> > >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 12:28:11AM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
> >> > >> > Hi,
> >> > >> > I encountered the following issue while booting 5.8-rc1 on Qemu for RV64.
> >> > >> > I added additional dump_stack and observed that it's happening in bpf free path.
> >> > >> > It happens always if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled. VM_BUG_ON_MM is
> >> > >> > compiled away without that.
> >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > forked to background, child pid 113
> >> > >> > [   10.328850] CPU: 3 PID: 51 Comm: kworker/3:1 Not tainted
> >> > >> > 5.8.0-rc1-dirty #732
> >> > >> > [   10.331739] Workqueue: events bpf_prog_free_deferred
> >> > >> > [   10.334133] Call Trace:
> >> > >> > [   10.338039] [<ffffffe000202698>] walk_stackframe+0x0/0xa4
> >> > >> > [   10.339988] [<ffffffe000202880>] show_stack+0x2e/0x3a
> >> > >> > [   10.340902] [<ffffffe00047074c>] dump_stack+0x72/0x8c
> >> > >> > [   10.341451] [<ffffffe0002db4ce>] mmap_assert_locked.part.13+0x14/0x1c
> >> > >> > [   10.342131] [<ffffffe0002db330>] walk_page_range_novma+0x0/0x4e
> >> > >> > [   10.342973] [<ffffffe000204f94>] set_direct_map_invalid_noflush+0x66/0x6e
> >> > >> > [   10.343917] [<ffffffe0002e0706>] __vunmap+0xe8/0x212
> >> > >> > [   10.344680] [<ffffffe0002e0882>] __vfree+0x22/0x6e
> >> > >> > [   10.345270] [<ffffffe0002e0902>] vfree+0x34/0x56
> >> > >> > [   10.345834] [<ffffffe00027d752>] __bpf_prog_free+0x2c/0x36
> >> > >> > [   10.346529] [<ffffffe0002801a2>] bpf_prog_free_deferred+0x74/0x8a
> >> > >> > [   10.347394] [<ffffffe000219c70>] process_one_work+0x13a/0x272
> >> > >> > [   10.348239] [<ffffffe00021a4b4>] worker_thread+0x50/0x2e4
> >> > >> > [   10.348900] [<ffffffe00021ed98>] kthread+0xfc/0x10a
> >> > >> > [   10.349470] [<ffffffe0002013da>] ret_from_exception+0x0/0xc
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] mm ffffffe001018600 mmap 0000000000000000 seqnum 0 task_size 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] get_unmapped_area 0000000000000000
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] mmap_base 0 mmap_legacy_base 0 highest_vm_end 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] pgd ffffffe001074000 mm_users 2 mm_count 1
> >> > >> > pgtables_bytes 8192 map_count 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] hiwater_rss 0 hiwater_vm 0 total_vm 0 locked_vm 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] pinned_vm 0 data_vm 0 exec_vm 0 stack_vm 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] start_code ffffffe000200000 end_code ffffffe00084acc2
> >> > >> > start_data 0 end_data ffffffe00106dfe4
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] start_brk 0 brk ffffffe0010bd6d0 start_stack 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] arg_start 0 arg_end 0 env_start 0 env_end 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] binfmt 0000000000000000 flags 0 core_state 0000000000000000
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] ioctx_table 0000000000000000
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] exe_file 0000000000000000
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] tlb_flush_pending 0
> >> > >> > [   10.354405] def_flags: 0x0()
> >> > >> > [   10.369325] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> >> > >> > [   10.370763] kernel BUG at include/linux/mmap_lock.h:81!
> >> > >> > [   10.375235] Kernel BUG [#1]
> >> > >> > [   10.377198] Modules linked in:
> >> > >> > [   10.378931] CPU: 3 PID: 51 Comm: kworker/3:1 Not tainted 5.8.0-rc1-dirty #732
> >> > >> > [   10.380179] Workqueue: events bpf_prog_free_deferred
> >> > >> > [   10.381270] epc: ffffffe0002db4d4 ra : ffffffe0002db4d4 sp : ffffffe3eaea7c70
> >> > >> > [   10.382561]  gp : ffffffe00106d950 tp : ffffffe3ef752f80 t0 :
> >> > >> > ffffffe0010836e8
> >> > >> > [   10.383996]  t1 : 0000000000000064 t2 : 0000000000000000 s0 :
> >> > >> > ffffffe3eaea7c90
> >> > >> > [   10.385119]  s1 : ffffffe001018600 a0 : 0000000000000289 a1 :
> >> > >> > 0000000000000020
> >> > >> > [   10.386099]  a2 : 0000000000000005 a3 : 0000000000000000 a4 :
> >> > >> > ffffffe001012758
> >> > >> > [   10.387294]  a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : 0000000000000102 a7 :
> >> > >> > 0000000000000006
> >> > >> > [   10.388265]  s2 : ffffffe3f00674c0 s3 : ffffffe00106e108 s4 :
> >> > >> > ffffffe00106e100
> >> > >> > [   10.389250]  s5 : ffffffe00106e908 s6 : 0000000000000000 s7 :
> >> > >> > 6db6db6db6db6db7
> >> > >> > [   10.390272]  s8 : 0000000000000001 s9 : ffffffe00021a4f8 s10:
> >> > >> > ffffffffffffffff
> >> > >> > [   10.391293]  s11: ffffffe3f0066600 t3 : 000000000001a7a8 t4 :
> >> > >> > 000000000001a7a8
> >> > >> > [   10.392314]  t5 : 0000000000000000 t6 : ffffffe00107b76b
> >> > >> > [   10.393096] status: 0000000000000120 badaddr: 0000000000000000
> >> > >> > cause: 0000000000000003
> >> > >> > [   10.397755] ---[ end trace 861659596ac28841 ]---
> >> > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > I haven't had the chance to bisect to figure out which commit caused
> >> > >> > the issue. Just wanted
> >> > >> > to check if it is a known issue already.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Hi Atish,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Note, I am getting the same (just now) when booting v5.8-rc1 on OpenRISC.  If
> >> > >> you have any updates please post back.  I will try to look into this today or
> >> > >> tomorrow.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have bisected this to, 42fc541404f249778e752ab39c8bc25fcb2dbe1e:
> >> > >
> >> > >   mmap locking API: add mmap_assert_locked() and mmap_assert_write_locked()
> >> > >
> >> > > This should have just changed the existing lockdep api's but something has
> >> > > changed.  I haven't had time to look at it yet.
> >> > >
> >> > > Ccing: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
> >> >
> >> > This isn't manifesting on boot for me, on either rc1 or that commit.  I'm
> >> > running a simple buildroot-based userspace, so I doubt anything is triggering
> >> > BPF.  I don't run the BPF selftests, as they're a bit of a pain (IIRC they
> >> > don't cross compile and need LLVM) -- does anyone have a userspace I can use to
> >> > trigger the bug?
> >>
> > I am also using buildroot based userspace but it's a bit bulky because
> > of my config.
> > You can access it from here:
> > https://wdc.box.com/s/r8j0d5ynp5gr27n2wo124xi9t8fp0tls
>
> I'm up to ~900M trying to get enough of a userspace to run the BPF selftests,
> so this would be way better.  Unfortunately I'm not actually getting the
> crash with your rootfs.
>

Strange. I see it every time with this rootfs and CONFIG_DEBUG_VM enabled.
Do you have CONFIG_DEBUG_VM enabled ?

> >
> > A defconfig build & boot in Qemu with above userspace is sufficient to
> > trigger the bug.
> >
> > FYI: I noticed the kernel bug message every time during ssh-key
> > generation. Not sure if that is related.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
> >> A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.



-- 
Regards,
Atish

Powered by blists - more mailing lists