From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH slab hotfixes v2 2/2] slub/kunit: skip test_kfree_rcu when the slub kunit test is built-in
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 16:44:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7f18cd71-4a4a-4d29-beb4-33f6d9fe3c12@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87f2fe09-ba6a-4405-b716-5325bb6a223b@roeck-us.net>
On 10/2/24 15:52, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/2/24 03:26, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 10/1/24 18:20, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> Guenter Roeck reports that the new slub kunit tests added by commit
>>> 4e1c44b3db79 ("kunit, slub: add test_kfree_rcu() and
>>> test_leak_destroy()") cause a lockup on boot on several architectures
>>> when the kunit tests are configured to be built-in and not modules.
>>>
>>> The test_kfree_rcu test invokes kfree_rcu() and boot sequence inspection
>>> showed the runner for built-in kunit tests kunit_run_all_tests() is
>>> called before setting system_state to SYSTEM_RUNNING and calling
>>> rcu_end_inkernel_boot(), so this seems like a likely cause. So while I
>>> was unable to reproduce the problem myself, skipping the test when the
>>> slub_kunit module is built-in should avoid the issue.
>>>
>>> An alternative fix that was moving the call to kunit_run_all_tests() a
>>> bit later in the boot was tried, but has broken tests with functions
>>> marked as __init due to free_initmem() already being done.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 4e1c44b3db79 ("kunit, slub: add test_kfree_rcu() and test_leak_destroy()")
>>> Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/6fcb1252-7990-4f0d-8027-5e83f0fb9409@roeck-us.net/
>>
>> I hope you can confirm it helps, because the commit added two tests and I've
>> only skipped one of them, as it's the one using kfree_rcu(), which is
>> suspected. But the other is responsible for the (now suppressed)
>> kmem_cache_destroy() warning, and maybe I'm missing something and it was
>> actually that one causing the lockups.
>>
>
> Everything works with your patches applied, so we are good.
Thanks for testing! Queued for -next now and will send to Linus later if
all's good.
>> Since you mentioned the boot lockups happened on some x86_64 too, do you
>> have a .config of the lockup case? I've tried tweaking some rcu options but
>> still nothing.
>>
>
> I have a bunch of debug options enabled. Configuration (generated using
> "make savedefconfig") for x86_64 is attached.
Hmm, didn't see the hang with that (using virtme-ng) on v6.12-rc1. Guess
there's something more to it. Oh well.
> Thanks,
> Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-02 14:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-01 16:20 [PATCH slab hotfixes v2 0/2] slub kunit tests fixes for 6.12 Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-01 16:20 ` [PATCH slab hotfixes v2 1/2] mm, slab: suppress warnings in test_leak_destroy kunit test Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-02 13:44 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-10-01 16:20 ` [PATCH slab hotfixes v2 2/2] slub/kunit: skip test_kfree_rcu when the slub kunit test is built-in Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-02 10:26 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-02 13:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-10-02 14:44 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2024-10-02 13:46 ` Guenter Roeck
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=7f18cd71-4a4a-4d29-beb4-33f6d9fe3c12@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rmoar@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--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