On 11/19/24 12:02 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Jens. > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 8:00?PM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 11/19/24 10:49 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 5:21?PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On 11/19/24 08:02, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On 11/19/24 8:36 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 09:16:32AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>>> Doesn't matter right now as there's still some bytes left for it, but >>>>>>> let's prepare for the io_kiocb potentially growing and add a specific >>>>>>> freeptr offset for it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch triggers: >>>>>> >>>>>> Kernel panic - not syncing: __kmem_cache_create_args: Failed to create slab 'io_kiocb'. Error -22 >>>>>> CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper Not tainted 6.12.0-mac-00971-g158f238aa69d #1 >>>>>> Stack from 00c63e5c: >>>>>> 00c63e5c 00612c1c 00612c1c 00000300 00000001 005f3ce6 004b9044 00612c1c >>>>>> 004ae21e 00000310 000000b6 005f3ce6 005f3ce6 ffffffea ffffffea 00797244 >>>>>> 00c63f20 000c6974 005ee588 004c9051 005f3ce6 ffffffea 000000a5 00c614a0 >>>>>> 004a72c2 0002cb62 000c675e 004adb58 0076f28a 005f3ce6 000000b6 00c63ef4 >>>>>> 00000310 00c63ef4 00000000 00000016 0076f23e 00c63f4c 00000010 00000004 >>>>>> 00000038 0000009a 01000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000020e0 0076f23e >>>>>> Call Trace: [<004b9044>] dump_stack+0xc/0x10 >>>>>> [<004ae21e>] panic+0xc4/0x252 >>>>>> [<000c6974>] __kmem_cache_create_args+0x216/0x26c >>>>>> [<004a72c2>] strcpy+0x0/0x1c >>>>>> [<0002cb62>] parse_args+0x0/0x1f2 >>>>>> [<000c675e>] __kmem_cache_create_args+0x0/0x26c >>>>>> [<004adb58>] memset+0x0/0x8c >>>>>> [<0076f28a>] io_uring_init+0x4c/0xca >>>>>> [<0076f23e>] io_uring_init+0x0/0xca >>>>>> [<000020e0>] do_one_initcall+0x32/0x192 >>>>>> [<0076f23e>] io_uring_init+0x0/0xca >>>>>> [<0000211c>] do_one_initcall+0x6e/0x192 >>>>>> [<004a72c2>] strcpy+0x0/0x1c >>>>>> [<0002cb62>] parse_args+0x0/0x1f2 >>>>>> [<000020ae>] do_one_initcall+0x0/0x192 >>>>>> [<0075c4e2>] kernel_init_freeable+0x1a0/0x1a4 >>>>>> [<0076f23e>] io_uring_init+0x0/0xca >>>>>> [<004b911a>] kernel_init+0x0/0xec >>>>>> [<004b912e>] kernel_init+0x14/0xec >>>>>> [<004b911a>] kernel_init+0x0/0xec >>>>>> [<0000252c>] ret_from_kernel_thread+0xc/0x14 >>>>>> >>>>>> when trying to boot the m68k:q800 machine in qemu. >>>>>> >>>>>> An added debug message in create_cache() shows the reason: >>>>>> >>>>>> #### freeptr_offset=154 object_size=182 flags=0x310 aligned=0 sizeof(freeptr_t)=4 >>>>>> >>>>>> freeptr_offset would need to be 4-byte aligned but that is not the >>>>>> case on m68k. >>>>> >>>>> Why is ->work 2-byte aligned to begin with on m68k?! >>>> >>>> My understanding is that m68k does not align pointers. >>> >>> The minimum alignment for multi-byte integral values on m68k is >>> 2 bytes. >>> >>> See also the comment at >>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.12/source/include/linux/maple_tree.h#L46 >> >> Maybe it's time we put m68k to bed? :-) >> >> We can add a forced alignment ->work to be 4 bytes, won't change >> anything on anything remotely current. But does feel pretty hacky to >> need to align based on some ancient thing. > > Why does freeptr_offset need to be 4-byte aligned? Didn't check, but it's slab/slub complaining using a 2-byte aligned address for the free pointer offset. It's explicitly checking: /* If a custom freelist pointer is requested make sure it's sane. */ err = -EINVAL; if (args->use_freeptr_offset && (args->freeptr_offset >= object_size || !(flags & SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU) || !IS_ALIGNED(args->freeptr_offset, sizeof(freeptr_t)))) goto out; -- Jens Axboe
