From: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, aubrey.li@linux.intel.com,
yu.c.chen@intel.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] sched: Move task_mm_cid_work to mm delayed work
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 15:37:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <35fe8e74229af24f45954dd27789363dd5c2f8b8.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1a295a1e-08da-4684-81be-9539773a1c94@efficios.com>
On Thu, 2025-02-13 at 08:55 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> On 2025-02-13 08:25, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> > On Thu, 2025-02-13 at 14:52 +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > kernel test robot noticed
> > > "WARNING:at_kernel/workqueue.c:#__queue_delayed_work" on:
> > >
> > > [ 2.640924][ T0] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > [ 2.641646][ T0] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at
> > > kernel/workqueue.c:2495
> > > __queue_delayed_work (kernel/workqueue.c:2495 (discriminator 9))
> > > [ 2.642874][ T0] Modules linked in:
> > > [ 2.643381][ T0] CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not
> > > tainted
> > > 6.14.0-rc2-00002-g287adf9e9c1f #1
> > > [ 2.644582][ T0] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX +
> > > PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.2-debian-1.16.2-1 04/01/2014
> > > [ 2.645943][ T0] RIP: 0010:__queue_delayed_work
> > > (kernel/workqueue.c:2495 (discriminator 9))
> >
> > There seem to be major problems with this configuration, I'm trying
> > to
> > understand what's wrong but, for the time being, this patchset is
> > not
> > ready for inclusion.
>
> I think there is an issue with the order of init functions at boot.
>
> poking_init() calls mm_alloc(), which ends up calling mm_init().
>
> The WARN_ON() is about a NULL wq pointer, which I suspect happens
> if poking_init() is called before workqueue_init_early(), which
> allocates system_wq.
>
> Indeed, in start_kernel(), poking_init() is called before
> workqueue_init_early().
>
> I'm not sure what are the init order dependencies across subsystems
> here.
> There is the following order in start_kernel():
>
> [...]
> mm_core_init();
> poking_init();
> ftrace_init();
>
> /* trace_printk can be enabled here */
> early_trace_init();
>
> /*
> * Set up the scheduler prior starting any interrupts (such
> as the
> * timer interrupt). Full topology setup happens at
> smp_init()
> * time - but meanwhile we still have a functioning
> scheduler.
> */
> sched_init();
>
> if (WARN(!irqs_disabled(),
> "Interrupts were enabled *very* early, fixing
> it\n"))
> local_irq_disable();
> radix_tree_init();
> maple_tree_init();
>
> /*
> * Set up housekeeping before setting up workqueues to allow
> the unbound
> * workqueue to take non-housekeeping into account.
> */
> housekeeping_init();
>
> /*
> * Allow workqueue creation and work item
> queueing/cancelling
> * early. Work item execution depends on kthreads and
> starts after
> * workqueue_init().
> */
> workqueue_init_early();
> [...]
>
> So either we find a way to reorder this, or we make sure
> poking_init()
> does not require the workqueue.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mathieu
>
Nice suggestion! That seems the culprit..
From the full dmesg of the failure I've seen there's also a problem
with disabling the delayed work synchronously, since mmdrop cannot
sleep if we are not in PREEMPT_RT.
I'm trying to come with some satisfactory solution for both, ideally:
1. the delayed work is not needed in early boot, we may have a better
place where to start it
2. we can cancel the work asynchronously on mmdrop and abort it if the
pcpu_cid is null, but it seems racy, perhaps there's a better place for
that too
Thanks,
Gabriele
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-13 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20250210153253.460471-1-gmonaco@redhat.com>
2025-02-10 15:32 ` [PATCH v6 1/3] sched: Compact RSEQ concurrency IDs with reduced threads and affinity Gabriele Monaco
2025-02-13 14:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-02-18 7:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-10 15:32 ` [PATCH v6 2/3] sched: Move task_mm_cid_work to mm delayed work Gabriele Monaco
2025-02-13 6:52 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-13 13:25 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-02-13 13:55 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-02-13 14:37 ` Gabriele Monaco [this message]
2025-02-13 14:52 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-02-13 14:54 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-02-13 17:31 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-02-14 6:44 ` Gabriele Monaco
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=35fe8e74229af24f45954dd27789363dd5c2f8b8.camel@redhat.com \
--to=gmonaco@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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