On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 11:34:59PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 11:22:09PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > Hello.
> > > >
> > > > I tried to test whether it is OK (from point of view of reentrant) to use
> > > > mutex_lock() or mutex_lock_killable() inside shrinker functions when shrinker
> > > > functions do memory allocation, for drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c is
> > > > doing memory allocation with mutex lock held inside ttm_dma_pool_shrink_scan().
> > > >
> > > > If I compile a test module shown below which mimics extreme case of what
> > > > ttm_dma_pool_shrink_scan() will do
> > >
> > > And ttm_pool_shrink_scan.
> >
> > I don't know why but ttm_pool_shrink_scan() does not take mutex.
> >
> Well, it seems to me that ttm_pool_shrink_scan() not taking mutex is a bug
> which could lead to stack overflow if kmalloc() in ttm_page_pool_free()
> triggered recursion.
>
> shrink_slab()
> => ttm_pool_shrink_scan()
> => ttm_page_pool_free()
> => kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL)
> => shrink_slab()
> => ttm_pool_shrink_scan()
> => ttm_page_pool_free()
> => kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL)
>
> Maybe shrink_slab() should be updated not to call same shrinker in parallel?
>
> Also, it seems to me that ttm_dma_pool_shrink_scan() has potential division
> by 0 bug as described below. Is this patch correct?
Looks OK. I would need to test it first. Could you send both patches
to me please so I can just test them and queue them up together?
Thank you!
> ----------
> >From 4a65744a300e14e5e202c5f13ba2759e1e797d29 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 18:25:42 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] gpu/drm/ttm: Use mutex_trylock() for shrinker functions.
>
> I can observe that RHEL7 environment stalls with 100% CPU usage when a
> certain type of memory pressure is given. While the shrinker functions
> are called by shrink_slab() before the OOM killer is triggered, the stall
> lasts for many minutes.
>
> One of reasons of this stall is that
> ttm_dma_pool_shrink_count()/ttm_dma_pool_shrink_scan() are called and
> are blocked at mutex_lock(&_manager->lock). GFP_KERNEL allocation with
> _manager->lock held causes someone (including kswapd) to deadlock when
> these functions are called due to memory pressure. This patch changes
> "mutex_lock();" to "if (!mutex_trylock()) return ...;" in order to
> avoid deadlock.
>
> At the same time, this patch fixes potential division by 0 due to
> unconditionally doing "% _manager->npools". This is because
> list_empty(&_manager->pools) being false does not guarantee that
> _manager->npools != 0 after taking the _manager->lock because
> _manager->npools is updated under the _manager->lock.
>
> At the same time, this patch moves updating of start_pool variable
> in order to avoid skipping when choosing a pool to shrink in
> round-robin style. The start_pool is changed from "atomic_t" to
> "unsigned int" because it is now updated under the _manager->lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: stable <stable@xxxxxxxxxx> [3.3+]
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
> index fb8259f..5e332b4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
> @@ -1004,9 +1004,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ttm_dma_unpopulate);
> static unsigned long
> ttm_dma_pool_shrink_scan(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> {
> - static atomic_t start_pool = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> + static unsigned int start_pool;
> unsigned idx = 0;
> - unsigned pool_offset = atomic_add_return(1, &start_pool);
> + unsigned pool_offset;
> unsigned shrink_pages = sc->nr_to_scan;
> struct device_pools *p;
> unsigned long freed = 0;
> @@ -1014,8 +1014,11 @@ ttm_dma_pool_shrink_scan(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> if (list_empty(&_manager->pools))
> return SHRINK_STOP;
>
> - mutex_lock(&_manager->lock);
> - pool_offset = pool_offset % _manager->npools;
> + if (!mutex_trylock(&_manager->lock))
> + return SHRINK_STOP;
> + if (!_manager->npools)
> + goto out;
> + pool_offset = ++start_pool % _manager->npools;
> list_for_each_entry(p, &_manager->pools, pools) {
> unsigned nr_free;
>
> @@ -1034,6 +1037,7 @@ ttm_dma_pool_shrink_scan(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> p->pool->dev_name, p->pool->name, current->pid,
> nr_free, shrink_pages);
> }
> +out:
> mutex_unlock(&_manager->lock);
> return freed;
> }
> @@ -1044,7 +1048,8 @@ ttm_dma_pool_shrink_count(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> struct device_pools *p;
> unsigned long count = 0;
>
> - mutex_lock(&_manager->lock);
> + if (!mutex_trylock(&_manager->lock))
> + return 0;
> list_for_each_entry(p, &_manager->pools, pools)
> count += p->pool->npages_free;
> mutex_unlock(&_manager->lock);
> --
> 1.8.3.1
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
