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: <0ED22CD02BE51541A6BCC0D6BDA097AE0F5A6D@EXMBX-BJ003.tencent.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:26:03 +0000
From:	dannyfeng(冯小天) <dannyfeng@...cent.com>
To:	Lekensteyn <lekensteyn@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION, v3.7-rc5, bisected] 100% CPU usage in softirqd,
 unable to shutdown(Internet mail)


________________________________________
发件人: Lekensteyn [lekensteyn@...il.com]
发送时间: 2012年11月13日 5:20
收件人: dannyfeng(冯小天); David S. Miller
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
主题: [REGRESSION, v3.7-rc5, bisected] 100% CPU usage in softirqd, unable to shutdown(Internet mail)

Hi,

After upgrading from 3.7-rc4 to 3.7-rc5 I found that I was unable to suspend
without locking up the system afterwards. Neither was I able to shutdown as it
would simply hang where it should halt. The second suspend/resume in a session
would make Networkmanager hang.

When looking in my process list, I saw that softirqd was using one full CPU
core. Watching the contents of /proc/softirqs showed that the tasklet number
would rapidly increase.

I got this message when trying to suspend for the second time in a session:

 Freezing user space processes ...
 Freezing of tasks failed after 20.01 seconds (1 tasks refusing to freeze,
wq_busy=0):
 NetworkManager  R  running task        0   332      1 0x00000004
  ffff88023169d628 ffffffff81549b86 ffff8802316e4470 ffff88023169dfd8
  ffff88023169dfd8 ffff88023169dfd8 ffff8802316e4470 ffff8802316e4470
  ffff88023169d698 ffff88023bc92a80 ffff88022fd3db70 ffff88022fd3dc90
 Call Trace:
  [<ffffffff81549b9e>] ? __schedule+0x13e/0x760
  [<ffffffff8154a4f9>] schedule+0x29/0x70
  [<ffffffff810722aa>] sys_sched_yield+0x4a/0x60
  [<ffffffff8154a7c2>] yield+0x32/0x40
  [<ffffffff810451f5>] tasklet_kill+0x35/0x80
  [<ffffffffa017c2f3>] jme_close+0xd3/0x850 [jme]
  [<ffffffff8146325d>] __dev_close_many+0x7d/0xc0
  [<ffffffff814632cd>] __dev_close+0x2d/0x40
  [<ffffffff81469551>] __dev_change_flags+0xa1/0x180
  [<ffffffff814696e8>] dev_change_flags+0x28/0x70
  [<ffffffff81475b68>] do_setlink+0x378/0xa00
  [<ffffffff81078a56>] ? find_busiest_group+0x36/0x490
  [<ffffffff812d5821>] ? nla_parse+0x31/0xe0
  [<ffffffff812d5821>] ? nla_parse+0x31/0xe0
  [<ffffffff81477e6e>] rtnl_newlink+0x36e/0x590
  [<ffffffff81286e16>] ? apparmor_capable+0x26/0x90
  [<ffffffff81477694>] rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x114/0x300
  [<ffffffff8114d1c3>] ? __kmalloc_node_track_caller+0x63/0x1b0
  [<ffffffff8145b65b>] ? __alloc_skb+0x8b/0x290
  [<ffffffff81477580>] ? __rtnl_unlock+0x20/0x20
  [<ffffffff8148f471>] netlink_rcv_skb+0xb1/0xc0
  [<ffffffff814748f5>] rtnetlink_rcv+0x25/0x40
  [<ffffffff8148ed8b>] netlink_unicast+0x19b/0x220
  [<ffffffff8148f111>] netlink_sendmsg+0x301/0x3c0
  [<ffffffff8144f8ec>] sock_sendmsg+0xbc/0xf0
  [<ffffffff81450797>] ? sock_recvmsg+0xd7/0x110
  [<ffffffff8145045c>] __sys_sendmsg+0x3ac/0x3c0
  [<ffffffff810854dc>] ? ktime_get_ts+0x4c/0xf0
  [<ffffffff81452699>] sys_sendmsg+0x49/0x90
  [<ffffffff81553906>] system_call_fastpath+0x1a/0x1f

Bisecting leads to:
commit 175c0dffef310fc7d7f026ca4a7682beb2fbd8ec
Author: Xiaotian Feng <xtfeng@...il.com>
Date:   Wed Oct 31 00:29:57 2012 +0000

    drivers/net: use tasklet_kill in device remove/close process

    Some driver uses tasklet_disable in device remove/close process,
    tasklet_disable will inc tasklet->count and return. If the tasklet
    is not handled yet because some softirq pressure, the tasklet will
    placed on the tasklet_vec, never have a chance to excute. This might
    lead to ksoftirqd heavy loaded, wakeup with pending_softirq, but
    tasklet is disabled. tasklet_kill should be used in this case.

    Signed-off-by: Xiaotian Feng <dannyfeng@...cent.com>
    Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
    Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
    Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
(if it wasn't obvious, I have an Ethernet device that needs the "jme" driver,
04:00.5 Ethernet controller [0200]: JMicron Technology Corp. JMC250 PCI
Express Gigabit Ethernet Controller [197b:0250] (rev 03))

Since 3.7, I sometimes get the below messages during suspend, but it would
never hang:
smpboot: CPU 2 is now offline
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 02
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 202
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 202
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 02
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 202
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 202
smpboot: CPU 3 is now offline

Time for a revert or do you have an other proposed fix?

I'm sorry, I didn't noticed that jme_open use tasklet_enable, which may reuse a killed tasklet...
Could you please try following patch?
---
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c
index 92317e9..c0314c1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c
@@ -1860,10 +1860,14 @@ jme_open(struct net_device *netdev)
        jme_clear_pm(jme);
        JME_NAPI_ENABLE(jme);
 
-       tasklet_enable(&jme->linkch_task);
-       tasklet_enable(&jme->txclean_task);
-       tasklet_hi_enable(&jme->rxclean_task);
-       tasklet_hi_enable(&jme->rxempty_task);
+       tasklet_init(&jme->linkch_task, jme_link_change_tasklet,
+                     (unsigned long) jme);
+       tasklet_init(&jme->txclean_task, jme_tx_clean_tasklet,
+                     (unsigned long) jme);
+       tasklet_init(&jme->rxclean_task, jme_rx_clean_tasklet,
+                     (unsigned long) jme);
+       tasklet_init(&jme->rxempty_task, jme_rx_empty_tasklet,
+                     (unsigned long) jme);
 
        rc = jme_request_irq(jme);
        if (rc)
@@ -3079,22 +3083,6 @@ jme_init_one(struct pci_dev *pdev,
        tasklet_init(&jme->pcc_task,
                     jme_pcc_tasklet,
                     (unsigned long) jme);
-       tasklet_init(&jme->linkch_task,
-                    jme_link_change_tasklet,
-                    (unsigned long) jme);
-       tasklet_init(&jme->txclean_task,
-                    jme_tx_clean_tasklet,
-                    (unsigned long) jme);
-       tasklet_init(&jme->rxclean_task,
-                    jme_rx_clean_tasklet,
-                    (unsigned long) jme);
-       tasklet_init(&jme->rxempty_task,
-                    jme_rx_empty_tasklet,
-                    (unsigned long) jme);
-       tasklet_disable_nosync(&jme->linkch_task);
-       tasklet_disable_nosync(&jme->txclean_task);
-       tasklet_disable_nosync(&jme->rxclean_task);
-       tasklet_disable_nosync(&jme->rxempty_task);
        jme->dpi.cur = PCC_P1;
 
        jme->reg_ghc = 0;


Regards,
Peter

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ