From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 828DCC2BBCA for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 01B5E6B00CF; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:34:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EE6866B00D0; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:34:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D60D56B00D4; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:34:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B55066B00CF for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:34:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin29.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A108026D for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:34:04 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82269806808.29.4FC9C35 Received: from mail-lf1-f53.google.com (mail-lf1-f53.google.com [209.85.167.53]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B62F180003 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:34:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=hMxEupCm; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of urezki@gmail.com designates 209.85.167.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=urezki@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1719329634; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=fWL9aq1cdURVir5BADc2ZTz6Xz4eWUl6fxWllepmeqQ=; b=wkyTGwuOtGvRBUFxCIlbf2K+vbRkPu1y4OdgCI9Xx65xASSqvEbFy5PeNvEQ8TpeO3mbEW 0buvVSYtKMC5iZYlMdzPUlHTkkBnLQ2HRSgJEf9X2yoe6+eaSctzKzRHXvVuxTd6FyePIy +n0aW3ihgBojRF6YYMA2Ho0DJTJimdE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=hMxEupCm; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of urezki@gmail.com designates 209.85.167.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=urezki@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1719329634; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=rvp6/Q64338HdaZURFdZZVvw5T7WHb9lSpox3fzWBs6ol0Cwz2bU1d8sQUJIs2pvNUZqH7 QgTrO9Au/YkVXgJQnd1n2AiFrIrPZ5VyUPXJZhu/G6yTr5bcQbgQE+tbcSnmqJAIKpzDYz CWwATB1aU5jIOivAWKrWuZTeDwW1wks= Received: by mail-lf1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52cd717ec07so4792026e87.0 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:34:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1719329640; x=1719934440; darn=kvack.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fWL9aq1cdURVir5BADc2ZTz6Xz4eWUl6fxWllepmeqQ=; b=hMxEupCmSQezBIKO3C/oozwNnvh2GwEQUobyKLv+83C+MAXMqBvJ6Kz1gxZcVfIycj 7MIwVFk998uDuei9LdlfIqvJY56rIoD+P08s8AOaeJI4au/STpHcEkGUZ4Ile5p9kXpB tDhHPj6DnhtfTgJNznuHNyidXcMb8uT2FSQBdQBD6dG3GaNPPpztGhO3oshZ4S7oShtW 3zpgZSTVZEKjT2+CJDwbqdMktOUuYOdAX6bzOcK87/UWdqZfazu2FTb+g4AA4sNT+fwc xzP04Z9/y0FuIRjDW7Z2bikEiUQwmsA9PAcZISMPj1dI/5VcLxVqh/b2S14wWS51BzWf a2xw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719329640; x=1719934440; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=fWL9aq1cdURVir5BADc2ZTz6Xz4eWUl6fxWllepmeqQ=; b=KDqE+hRPac5ucos+R7n0Xii7JC6DOvtRox26Kv7i3rGu9O3xkCdQmWKIHYlUxLlku8 1LHlOu3TKcy4CqFlJQi9QRVUK1BFz+XRFjbTiRwvydODjz0tzxEAjFu2uXRdjZqViwsF 0pHBaM3PHbbmuvs+UAQQ3T9X3w5FGlY7smZy64xkQIuf3VCgV8IeHRIL11mIuih3EskZ uaIyKF843794BFtOu83o7mNbmxb6jjM5Jnpip5TX22lOJiD2TcTXNVSJfQ9OR889YzKk Rbjeg3O/w9CoSB9Ey0p5fj8zT0rBY3boh/SdRxRQBWkdnj7YRlMTgQiRcey1TO//ofep wcxQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWWS6LpaY422JMJ7BRZpSA82S8xJJ51GSfB1mGOE8kJ4Ds4sTWfi+Og94JjX2igaPZdB+AEBt122WuKxlUZNDUuwAg= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwbwS9HAj4SjFM/lJ+RTUSSsQSB5+T9ryrfZKYrMa+MDZyrbIRQ rBT4E8Y3OOCV7JFypk8Fiuy+8qxG5bCEhQ6sPs9nnKlevf+F+oAqveMZXA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHnZjnJMconf8H13iDPWZ8xrfkoezsaE3ZY5gP+CacdGRe1jWjN1MqrVToiHaNuNaAbqOT5eQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5119:0:b0:52c:db52:3cb3 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52ce183b56bmr4507221e87.39.1719329640074; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc636 (host-90-233-219-252.mobileonline.telia.com. [90.233.219.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 2adb3069b0e04-52cf33265d6sm153493e87.160.2024.06.25.08.33.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:33:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:33:57 +0200 To: Baoquan He , Hailong Liu Cc: Uladzislau Rezki , Nick Bowler , Hailong Liu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux regressions mailing list , linux-mm@kvack.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: PROBLEM: kernel crashes when running xfsdump since ~6.4 Message-ID: References: <20240621033005.6mccm7waduelb4m5@oppo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3B62F180003 X-Stat-Signature: 7ijm4i4t65mnihjqb4gqa1mnfnbykx5h X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1719329641-812209 X-HE-Meta: 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 QYoZuhVe 2AVKTSI4HsWQqQiUndd717uFqOcSMYjOM9af8Eh9PQoo8Upyc5pPF5gsysiOLSh59J7A+FFs9On0jui8v8YT6zazWNBkCMYVxFCZlt49wnWAQotmsLl+72vde6wCjp+ZUHKskmg822pduXdgPoLw5OJv+co03qnROgFA/bxcN4En1Mwk8En45qVXBRdwGO8lU0A960d5ZD2hxaFvfD5vuYBSwwW7EjLLQZ3jR64rpiRuyEwsciegvmKaWbcZXAOCfv7kbezBpXlqgH3rqpKov03h3+Y2Jg6qEuY52NxOBc/0Gh3mdUp+LQVGVB6S0rhPn26w6nDe9jxStopzhO6oeCjp8AAnfGfkWqEHJqR8vtKPqEkaHdKoG1p+ppg== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 09:02:43PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > On 06/25/24 at 02:40pm, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 07:40:21PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > > On 06/25/24 at 12:32pm, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:30:33AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > > > > On 06/24/24 at 02:16pm, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:02:50PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > > > > > > On 06/21/24 at 11:44am, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 03:07:16PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 06/21/24 at 11:30am, Hailong Liu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 20. Jun 14:02, Nick Bowler wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024-06-20 02:19, Nick Bowler wrote: > > > > > > > ...... > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > > > > > index be2dd281ea76..18e87cafbaf2 100644 > > > > > > > > > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > > > > > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > > > > > @@ -2542,7 +2542,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct vmap_block_queue, vmap_block_queue); > > > > > > > > > static struct xarray * > > > > > > > > > addr_to_vb_xa(unsigned long addr) > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > - int index = (addr / VMAP_BLOCK_SIZE) % num_possible_cpus(); > > > > > > > > > + int index = (addr / VMAP_BLOCK_SIZE) % nr_cpu_ids; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > return &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, index).vmap_blocks; > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem i see is about not-initializing of the: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for_each_possible_cpu(i) { > > > > > > > > struct vmap_block_queue *vbq; > > > > > > > > struct vfree_deferred *p; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vbq = &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, i); > > > > > > > > spin_lock_init(&vbq->lock); > > > > > > > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vbq->free); > > > > > > > > p = &per_cpu(vfree_deferred, i); > > > > > > > > init_llist_head(&p->list); > > > > > > > > INIT_WORK(&p->wq, delayed_vfree_work); > > > > > > > > xa_init(&vbq->vmap_blocks); > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correctly or fully. It is my bad i did not think that CPUs in a possible mask > > > > > > > > can be non sequential :-/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nr_cpu_ids - is not the max possible CPU. For example, in Nick case, > > > > > > > > when he has two CPUs, num_possible_cpus() and nr_cpu_ids are the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I checked the generic version of setup_nr_cpu_ids(), from codes, they > > > > > > > are different with my understanding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kernel/smp.c > > > > > > > void __init setup_nr_cpu_ids(void) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > set_nr_cpu_ids(find_last_bit(cpumask_bits(cpu_possible_mask), NR_CPUS) + 1); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see that it is not a weak function, so it is generic, thus the > > > > > > behavior can not be overwritten, which is great. This does what we > > > > > > need. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for checking this you are right! > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for confirming this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then it is just a matter of proper initialization of the hash: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > > index 5d3aa2dc88a8..1733946f7a12 100644 > > > > > > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > > @@ -5087,7 +5087,13 @@ void __init vmalloc_init(void) > > > > > > */ > > > > > > vmap_area_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(vmap_area, SLAB_PANIC); > > > > > > > > > > > > - for_each_possible_cpu(i) { > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > + * We use "nr_cpu_ids" here because some architectures > > > > > > + * may have "gaps" in cpu-possible-mask. It is OK for > > > > > > + * per-cpu approaches but is not OK for cases where it > > > > > > + * can be used as hashes also. > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > + for (i = 0; i < nr_cpu_ids; i++) { > > > > > > > > > > I was wrong about earlier comments. Percpu variables are only available > > > > > on possible CPUs. For those nonexistent possible CPUs of static percpu > > > > > variable vmap_block_queue, there isn't memory allocated and mapped for > > > > > them. So accessing into them will cause problem. > > > > > > > > > > In Nick's case, there are only CPU0, CPU2. If you access > > > > > &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, 1), problem occurs. So I think we may need to > > > > > change to take other way for vbq. E.g: > > > > > 1) Storing the vb in the nearest neighbouring vbq on possible CPU as > > > > > below draft patch; > > > > > 2) create an normal array to store vbq of size nr_cpu_ids, then we can > > > > > store/fetch each vbq on non-possible CPU? > > > > > > > > > A correct way, i think, is to create a normal array. A quick fix can be > > > > to stick to a next possible CPU. > > > > > > > > > The way 1) is simpler, the existing code can be adapted a little just as > > > > > below. > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > index 633363997dec..59a8951cc6c0 100644 > > > > > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c > > > > > @@ -2542,7 +2542,10 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct vmap_block_queue, vmap_block_queue); > > > > > static struct xarray * > > > > > addr_to_vb_xa(unsigned long addr) > > > > > { > > > > > - int index = (addr / VMAP_BLOCK_SIZE) % num_possible_cpus(); > > > > > + int index = (addr / VMAP_BLOCK_SIZE) % nr_cpu_ids; > > > > > + > > > > > + if (!cpu_possible(idex)) > > > > > + index = cpumask_next(index, cpu_possible_mask); > > > > > > > > > cpumask_next() can return nr_cpu_ids if no next bits set. > > > > > > It won't. nr_cpu_ids is the largest index + 1, the hashed index will > > > be: 0 =< index <= (nr_cpu_ids - 1) e.g cpu_possible_mask is > > > b10001111, the nr_cpu_ids is 8, the largest bit is cpu7. > > > cpu_possible(index) will check that. So the largest bit of cpumask_next() > > > returns is (nr_cpu_ids - 1). > > > > > /** > > * cpumask_next - get the next cpu in a cpumask > > * @n: the cpu prior to the place to search (i.e. return will be > @n) > > * @srcp: the cpumask pointer > > * > > * Return: >= nr_cpu_ids if no further cpus set. > > Ah, I got what you mean. In the vbq case, it may not have chance to get > a return number as nr_cpu_ids. Becuase the hashed index limits the > range to [0, nr_cpu_ids-1], and cpu_possible(index) will guarantee it > won't be the highest cpu number [nr_cpu_ids-1] since CPU[nr_cpu_ids-1] must > be possible CPU. > > Do I miss some corner cases? > Right. We guarantee that a highest CPU is available by doing: % nr_cpu_ids. So we do not need to use *next_wrap() variant. You do not miss anything :) Hailong Liu has proposed more simpler version: diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c index 11fe5ea208aa..e1e63ffb9c57 100644 --- a/mm/vmalloc.c +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c @@ -1994,8 +1994,9 @@ static struct xarray * addr_to_vb_xa(unsigned long addr) { int index = (addr / VMAP_BLOCK_SIZE) % num_possible_cpus(); + int cpu = cpumask_nth(index, cpu_possible_mask); - return &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, index).vmap_blocks; + return &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, cpu).vmap_blocks; which just takes a next CPU if an index is not set in the cpu_possible_mask. The only thing that can be updated in the patch is to replace num_possible_cpu() by the nr_cpu_ids. Any thoughts? I think we need to fix it by a minor change so it is easier to back-port on stable kernels. -- Uladzislau Rezki