linux-kernel - Re: [workqueue] d5bff968ea: WARNING:at_kernel/workqueue.c:#process_one

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <bfb8370e-43e4-7f72-a71f-8481eb66f6ed@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:20:18 +0800
From:   Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>
To:     paulmck@...nel.org, Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Cc:     Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...el.com,
        lkp <lkp@...ts.01.org>
Subject: Re: [workqueue] d5bff968ea:
 WARNING:at_kernel/workqueue.c:#process_one_work



On 1/29/2021 2:08 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 05:09:05PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:52:40 +0800 Xing Zhengjun wrote:
> 
> [ . . . ]
> 
>>> I test the patch 4 times, no warning appears in the kernel log.
>>
>> Thank you so much Zhengjun!
>>
>> And the overall brain dump so far is
>>
>> 1/ before and after d5bff968ea, changing the allowed ptr at online time
>> is the key to quiesce the warning in process_one_work().
>>
>> 2/ marking pcpu before changing aptr in rebind_workers() is mandatory in
>> regards to cutting the risk of triggering such a warning.
>>
>> 3/ we canot maintain such an order without quiescing the 508 warning for
>> kworkers. And we have a couple of excuses to do so, a) the number of
>> allowed CPUs is no longer checked in is_per_cpu_kthread() instead of
>> PF_NO_SETAFFINITY, b) there is always a followup act to change the aptr
>> in order to fix the number of aCPUs.
>>
>> 4/ same order is maintained also at rescue time.
> 
> Just out of curiosity, does this test still fail on current mainline?
> 
> 							Thanx, Paul
> 
I test mainline v5.11-rc5, it has no issue. The issue is only for 
d5bff968ea which is in 
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git 
dev.2021.01.11b.

-- 
Zhengjun Xing