linux-kernel - Re: BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP

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

Message-ID: <dc1e9f3a-b40f-8db3-bce3-07c3c12af8ea@ozlabs.ru>
Date:   Sat, 23 Jan 2021 22:26:28 +1100
From:   Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Cc:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS too low!



On 23/01/2021 21:29, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2021/01/23 15:35, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> this behaves quite different but still produces the message (i have show_workqueue_state() right after the bug message):
>>
>>
>> [   85.803991] BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS too low!
>> [   85.804338] turning off the locking correctness validator.
>> [   85.804474] Showing busy workqueues and worker pools:
>> [   85.804620] workqueue events_unbound: flags=0x2
>> [   85.804764]   pwq 16: cpus=0-7 flags=0x4 nice=0 active=1/512 refcnt=3
>> [   85.804965]     in-flight: 81:bpf_map_free_deferred
>> [   85.805229] workqueue events_power_efficient: flags=0x80
>> [   85.805357]   pwq 4: cpus=2 node=0 flags=0x0 nice=0 active=1/256 refcnt=2
>> [   85.805558]     in-flight: 57:gc_worker
>> [   85.805877] pool 4: cpus=2 node=0 flags=0x0 nice=0 hung=0s workers=3 idle: 82 24
>> [   85.806147] pool 16: cpus=0-7 flags=0x4 nice=0 hung=69s workers=3 idle: 7 251
>> ^C[  100.129747] maxlockdep (5104) used greatest stack depth: 8032 bytes left
>>
>> root@...dbg:~# grep "lock-classes" /proc/lockdep_stats
>>   lock-classes:                         8192 [max: 8192]
>>
> 
> Right. Hillf's patch can reduce number of active workqueue's worker threads, for
> only one worker thread can call bpf_map_free_deferred() (which is nice because
> it avoids bloat of active= and refcnt= fields). But Hillf's patch is not for
> fixing the cause of "BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS too low!" message.
> 
> Like Dmitry mentioned, bpf syscall allows producing work items faster than
> bpf_map_free_deferred() can consume. (And a similar problem is observed for
> network namespaces.) Unless there is a bug that prevents bpf_map_free_deferred()
>   from completing, the classical solution is to put pressure on producers (i.e.
> slow down bpf syscall side) in a way that consumers (i.e. __bpf_map_put())
> will not schedule thousands of backlog "struct bpf_map" works.


Should not the first 8192 from "grep lock-classes /proc/lockdep_stats" 
decrease after time (it does not), or once it has failed, it is permanent?




-- 
Alexey