On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 4:17 PM Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, 2020-06-28 at 16:14 +0300, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > On Sun, 2020-06-28 at 15:53 +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 2:14 PM Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I just did usual kernel update and now chromium crashes on startup. > > > > It happens both in a KVM's VM (with virtio-gpu if that matters) and natively with amdgpu driver. > > > > Most likely not GPU related although I initially suspected that it is. > > > > > > > > Chromium starts as a white rectangle, shows few white rectangles > > > > that resemble its notifications and then crashes. > > > > > > > > The stdout output from chromium: > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > Received signal 6 > > > > #0 0x55f6da0120d9 base::debug::CollectStackTrace() > > > > #1 0x55f6d9f75246 base::debug::StackTrace::StackTrace() > > > > #2 0x55f6da01170a base::debug::(anonymous namespace)::StackDumpSignalHandler() > > > > #3 0x55f6da011cfe base::debug::(anonymous namespace)::StackDumpSignalHandler() > > > > #4 0x7ff46643ab20 (/usr/lib64/libpthread-2.30.so+0x14b1f) > > > > #5 0x7ff462d87625 __GI_raise > > > > #6 0x7ff462d708d9 __GI_abort > > > > #7 0x55f6da0112d5 base::debug::BreakDebugger() > > > > #8 0x55f6d9f86405 logging::LogMessage::~LogMessage() > > > > #9 0x55f6d7ed5488 content::(anonymous namespace)::IntentionallyCrashBrowserForUnusableGpuProcess() > > > > #10 0x55f6d7ed8479 content::GpuDataManagerImplPrivate::FallBackToNextGpuMode() > > > > #11 0x55f6d7ed4eef content::GpuDataManagerImpl::FallBackToNextGpuMode() > > > > #12 0x55f6d7ee0f41 content::GpuProcessHost::RecordProcessCrash() > > > > #13 0x55f6d7ee105d content::GpuProcessHost::OnProcessCrashed() > > > > #14 0x55f6d7cbe308 content::BrowserChildProcessHostImpl::OnChildDisconnected() > > > > #15 0x55f6da8b511a IPC::ChannelMojo::OnPipeError() > > > > #16 0x55f6da13cd62 mojo::InterfaceEndpointClient::NotifyError() > > > > #17 0x55f6da8c1f9d IPC::(anonymous namespace)::ChannelAssociatedGroupController::OnPipeError() > > > > #18 0x55f6da138968 mojo::Connector::HandleError() > > > > #19 0x55f6da15bce7 mojo::SimpleWatcher::OnHandleReady() > > > > #20 0x55f6da15c0fb mojo::SimpleWatcher::Context::CallNotify() > > > > #21 0x55f6d78eaa73 mojo::core::WatcherDispatcher::InvokeWatchCallback() > > > > #22 0x55f6d78ea38f mojo::core::Watch::InvokeCallback() > > > > #23 0x55f6d78e6efa mojo::core::RequestContext::~RequestContext() > > > > #24 0x55f6d78db76a mojo::core::NodeChannel::OnChannelError() > > > > #25 0x55f6d78f232a mojo::core::(anonymous namespace)::ChannelPosix::OnFileCanReadWithoutBlocking() > > > > #26 0x55f6da03345e base::MessagePumpLibevent::OnLibeventNotification() > > > > #27 0x55f6da0f9b2d event_base_loop > > > > #28 0x55f6da03316d base::MessagePumpLibevent::Run() > > > > #29 0x55f6d9fd79c9 base::sequence_manager::internal::ThreadControllerWithMessagePumpImpl::Run() > > > > #30 0x55f6d9fada7a base::RunLoop::Run() > > > > #31 0x55f6d7ce6324 content::BrowserProcessSubThread::IOThreadRun() > > > > #32 0x55f6d9fe0cb8 base::Thread::ThreadMain() > > > > #33 0x55f6da024705 base::(anonymous namespace)::ThreadFunc() > > > > #34 0x7ff46642f4e2 start_thread > > > > #35 0x7ff462e4c6a3 __GI___clone > > > > r8: 0000000000000000 r9: 00007ff44e6a58d0 r10: 0000000000000008 r11: 0000000000000246 > > > > r12: 00007ff44e6a6b40 r13: 00007ff44e6a6d00 r14: 000000000000006d r15: 00007ff44e6a6b30 > > > > di: 0000000000000002 si: 00007ff44e6a58d0 bp: 00007ff44e6a5b20 bx: 00007ff44e6a9700 > > > > dx: 0000000000000000 ax: 0000000000000000 cx: 00007ff462d87625 sp: 00007ff44e6a58d0 > > > > ip: 00007ff462d87625 efl: 0000000000000246 cgf: 002b000000000033 erf: 0000000000000000 > > > > trp: 0000000000000000 msk: 0000000000000000 cr2: 0000000000000000 > > > > [end of stack trace] > > > > Calling _exit(1). Core file will not be generated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess this answers our question whether we could disable fsnoitfy > > > watches on pseudo inodes.... > > > > > > From comments like these in chromium code: > > > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/mojo/core/watcher_dispatcher.cc#77 > > > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/base/files/file_descriptor_watcher_posix.cc#176 > > > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/ipc/ipc_channel_mojo.cc#240 > > > > > > I am taking a wild guess that the missing FS_CLOSE event on anonymous pipes is > > > the cause for regression. > > > > > > The motivation for the patch "fs: Do not check if there is a fsnotify > > > watcher on pseudo inodes" > > > was performance, but actually, FS_CLOSE and FS_OPEN events probably do > > > not impact > > > performance as FS_MODIFY and FS_ACCESS. > > > > > > Mel, > > > > > > Do your perf results support the claim above? > > > > > > Jan/Linus, > > > > > > Do you agree that dropping FS_MODIFY/FS_ACCESS events for FMODE_STREAM > > > files as a general rule should be safe? > > > > > > Maxim, can you try if the attached patch fixes the chromium regression. > > > It is expected to leave the FS_OPEN/FS_CLOSE events on anonymous pipes > > > but drop the FS_MODIFY/FS_ACCESS events. > > Tested this (in the VM this time) and it works. > > > Note that this should be changed to 'return' since function returns void. > > + if (file->f_mode & FMODE_STREAM) > + return 0; > Right sorry. Didn't pay attention to the build warnings. Now only left to see if this approach is acceptable and if it also fixes the performance issue reported by Mel. Then we can start figuring out how to handle other pseudo inodes on which events may race with unmount. Thanks, Amir.
