linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David Wang" <00107082@163.com>
To: "Uladzislau Rezki" <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: "Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com>,
	oliver.sang@intel.com, ahuang12@lenovo.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, bhe@redhat.com, hch@infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, lkp@intel.com,
	mjguzik@gmail.com, oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, harry.yoo@oracle.com,
	kent.overstreet@linux.dev
Subject: Re: CONFIG_TEST_VMALLOC=y conflict/race with alloc_tag_init
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 21:20:30 +0800 (CST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1bf07448.b30e.1979cf28ac5.Coremail.00107082@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aFk8I4qNG9ntonTa@pc636>


At 2025-06-23 19:36:03, "Uladzislau Rezki" <urezki@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 10:45:31AM +0800, David Wang wrote:
>> 
>> At 2025-06-23 06:50:44, "Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com> wrote:
>> >On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 3:03 AM David Wang <00107082@163.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 02:25:37PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> >
>> >> > for this change, we reported
>> >> > "[linux-next:master] [lib/test_vmalloc.c]  7fc85b92db: Mem-Info"
>> >> > in
>> >> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/202505071555.e757f1e0-lkp@intel.com/
>> >> >
>> >> > at that time, we made some tests with x86_64 config which runs well.
>> >> >
>> >> > now we noticed the commit is in mainline now.
>> >>
>> >> > the config still has expected diff with parent:
>> >> >
>> >> > --- /pkg/linux/x86_64-randconfig-161-20250614/gcc-12/7a73348e5d4715b5565a53f21c01ea7b54e46cbd/.config   2025-06-17 14:40:29.481052101 +0800
>> >> > +++ /pkg/linux/x86_64-randconfig-161-20250614/gcc-12/2d76e79315e403aab595d4c8830b7a46c19f0f3b/.config   2025-06-17 14:41:18.448543738 +0800
>> >> > @@ -7551,7 +7551,7 @@ CONFIG_TEST_IDA=m
>> >> >  CONFIG_TEST_MISC_MINOR=m
>> >> >  # CONFIG_TEST_LKM is not set
>> >> >  CONFIG_TEST_BITOPS=m
>> >> > -CONFIG_TEST_VMALLOC=m
>> >> > +CONFIG_TEST_VMALLOC=y
>> >> >  # CONFIG_TEST_BPF is not set
>> >> >  CONFIG_FIND_BIT_BENCHMARK=m
>> >> >  # CONFIG_TEST_FIRMWARE is not set
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > then we noticed similar random issue with x86_64 randconfig this time.
>> >> >
>> >> > 7a73348e5d4715b5 2d76e79315e403aab595d4c8830
>> >> > ---------------- ---------------------------
>> >> >        fail:runs  %reproduction    fail:runs
>> >> >            |             |             |
>> >> >            :199         34%          67:200   dmesg.KASAN:null-ptr-deref_in_range[#-#]
>> >> >            :199         34%          67:200   dmesg.Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Fatal_exception
>> >> >            :199         34%          67:200   dmesg.Mem-Info
>> >> >            :199         34%          67:200   dmesg.Oops:general_protection_fault,probably_for_non-canonical_address#:#[##]SMP_KASAN
>> >> >            :199         34%          67:200   dmesg.RIP:down_read_trylock
>> >> >
>> >> > we don't have enough knowledge to understand the relationship between code
>> >> > change and the random issues. just report what we obsverved in our tests FYI.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I think this is caused by a race between vmalloc_test_init and alloc_tag_init.
>> >>
>> >> vmalloc_test actually depends on alloc_tag via alloc_tag_top_users, because when
>> >> memory allocation fails show_mem() would invoke alloc_tag_top_users.
>> >>
>> >> With following configuration:
>> >>
>> >> CONFIG_TEST_VMALLOC=y
>> >> CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING=y
>> >> CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_ENABLED_BY_DEFAULT=y
>> >> CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_DEBUG=y
>> >>
>> >> If vmalloc_test_init starts before alloc_tag_init, show_mem() would cause
>> >> a NULL deference because alloc_tag_cttype was not init yet.
>> >>
>> >> I add some debug to confirm this theory
>> >> diff --git a/lib/alloc_tag.c b/lib/alloc_tag.c
>> >> index d48b80f3f007..9b8e7501010f 100644
>> >> --- a/lib/alloc_tag.c
>> >> +++ b/lib/alloc_tag.c
>> >> @@ -133,6 +133,8 @@ size_t alloc_tag_top_users(struct codetag_bytes *tags, size_t count, bool can_sl
>> >>         struct codetag *ct;
>> >>         struct codetag_bytes n;
>> >>         unsigned int i, nr = 0;
>> >> +       pr_info("memory profiling alloc top %d: %llx\n", mem_profiling_support, (long long)alloc_tag_cttype);
>> >> +       return 0;
>> >>
>> >>         if (can_sleep)
>> >>                 codetag_lock_module_list(alloc_tag_cttype, true);
>> >> @@ -831,6 +833,7 @@ static int __init alloc_tag_init(void)
>> >>                 shutdown_mem_profiling(true);
>> >>                 return PTR_ERR(alloc_tag_cttype);
>> >>         }
>> >> +       pr_info("memory profiling ready %d: %llx\n", mem_profiling_support, (long long)alloc_tag_cttype);
>> >>
>> >>         return 0;
>> >>  }
>> >>
>> >> When bootup the kernel, the log shows:
>> >>
>> >> $ sudo dmesg -T | grep profiling
>> >> [Fri Jun 20 17:29:35 2025] memory profiling alloc top 1: 0  <--- alloc_tag_cttype == NULL
>> >> [Fri Jun 20 17:30:24 2025] memory profiling ready 1: ffff9b1641aa06c0
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> vmalloc_test_init should happened after alloc_tag_init if CONFIG_TEST_VMALLOC=y,
>> >> or mem_show() should check whether alloc_tag is done initialized when calling
>> >> alloc_tag_top_users
>> >
>> >Thanks for reporting!
>> >So, IIUC https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250620195305.1115151-1-harry.yoo@oracle.com/
>> >will address this issue as well. Is that correct?
>> 
>> Yes, the panic can be fix by that patch.
>> 
>> I still feel it better to delay vmalloc_test_init, make it happen after alloc_tag_init.
>>
>We can, but then we would not notice the bag that is in question :)

Yes,   strangely lucky here~ :)
I was thinking, if some vmalloc tests fail, is alloc_tag_top_users helpful for debug?
Considering this bug has already been caught,  if alloc_tag_top_users is helpful for vmalloc test analysis,
maybe it is still reasonable to delay vmalloc_test_init?... ☺︎

>
>At least we should, i think, to exclude the tests which trigger warnings
>when the test-suite is run with default configurations, i.e. run the tests
>which are not supposed to fail.



>
>--
>Uladzislau Rezki

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-23 13:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-18  6:25 [linus:master] [lib/test_vmalloc.c] 2d76e79315: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Fatal_exception kernel test robot
2025-06-19 14:10 ` Kernel crash due to alloc_tag_top_users() being called when !mem_profiling_support? Harry Yoo
2025-06-19 15:04   ` Harry Yoo
2025-06-20  8:47     ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-06-22 22:54       ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-06-23 11:29         ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-06-19 15:08   ` David Wang
2025-06-20  1:14     ` Harry Yoo
2025-06-20  0:40 ` [PATCH] lib/alloc_tag: do not acquire nonexistent lock when mem profiling is disabled Harry Yoo
2025-06-20  3:09   ` David Wang
2025-06-20 10:40     ` [PATCH] " Harry Yoo
2025-06-20 11:33       ` Harry Yoo
2025-06-20 13:59         ` David Wang
2025-06-20 12:47       ` Harry Yoo
2025-06-20 10:02 ` CONFIG_TEST_VMALLOC=y conflict/race with alloc_tag_init David Wang
2025-06-22 22:50   ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-06-23  2:04     ` Harry Yoo
2025-06-23  2:45     ` David Wang
2025-06-23  3:16       ` David Wang
2025-06-23  4:39         ` David Wang
2025-06-23 11:36       ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-06-23 13:20         ` David Wang [this message]
2025-06-20 14:24 ` [PATCH] lib/test_vmalloc.c: demote vmalloc_test_init to late_initcall David Wang
2025-06-20 19:59   ` Harry Yoo
2025-06-20 19:53 ` [PATCH v2] lib/alloc_tag: do not acquire non-existent lock in alloc_tag_top_users() Harry Yoo
2025-06-21  3:43   ` David Wang
2025-06-22 22:24     ` [PATCH " Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-06-23  2:01       ` Harry Yoo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1bf07448.b30e.1979cf28ac5.Coremail.00107082@163.com \
    --to=00107082@163.com \
    --cc=ahuang12@lenovo.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bhe@redhat.com \
    --cc=harry.yoo@oracle.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
    --cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox