On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:40:02AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:41:13PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 11:52:27AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > It should be. I expect that's why you have never seen the bugon in > > > swapops. > > > > Oh I just got the very crash you're talking about with aa.git with > > your v8 code. Weird that I never reproduced it before! I think it's > > because I fixed gcc to be fully backed by hugepages always (without > > khugepaged) and I was rebuilding a couple of packages, and that now > > triggers memory compaction much more, but mixed with heavy > > fork/execve. This is the only instability I managed to reproduce over > > 24 hours of stress testing and it's clearly not related to transparent > > hugepage support but it's either a bug in migrate.c (more likely) or > > memory compaction. > > > > Note that I'm running with the 2.6.33 anon-vma code, so it will > > relieve you to know it's not the anon-vma recent changes causing this > > (well I can't rule out anon-vma bugs, but if it's anon-vma, it's a > > longstanding one). > > > > kernel BUG at include/linux/swapops.h:105! > > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP > > last sysfs file: /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:12.0/host0/target0:0:0/0:0:0:0/block/sr0/size > > CPU 0 > > Modules linked in: nls_iso8859_1 loop twofish twofish_common tun bridge stp llc bnep sco rfcomm l2cap bluetooth snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq snd_seq_device snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss usbhid gspca_pac207 gspca_main videodev v4l1_compat v4l2_compat_ioctl32 snd_hda_codec_realtek ohci_hcd snd_hda_intel ehci_hcd usbcore snd_hda_codec snd_pcm snd_timer snd snd_page_alloc sg psmouse sr_mod pcspkr > > > > Pid: 13351, comm: basename Not tainted 2.6.34-rc5 #23 M2A-VM/System Product Name > > RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff810e66b0>] [<ffffffff810e66b0>] migration_entry_wait+0x170/0x180 > > RSP: 0000:ffff88009ab6fa58 EFLAGS: 00010246 > > RAX: ffffea0000000000 RBX: ffffea000234eed8 RCX: ffff8800aaa95298 > > RDX: 00000000000a168d RSI: ffff88000411ae28 RDI: ffffea00025550a8 > > RBP: ffffea0002555098 R08: ffff88000411ae28 R09: 0000000000000000 > > R10: 0000000000000008 R11: 0000000000000009 R12: 00000000aaa95298 > > R13: 00007ffff8a53000 R14: ffff88000411ae28 R15: ffff88011108a7c0 > > FS: 00002adf29469b90(0000) GS:ffff880001a00000(0000) knlGS:0000000055700d50 > > CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b > > CR2: 00007ffff8a53000 CR3: 0000000004f80000 CR4: 00000000000006f0 > > DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > > DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > > Process basename (pid: 13351, threadinfo ffff88009ab6e000, task ffff88009ab96c70) > > Stack: > > ffff8800aaa95280 ffffffff810ce472 ffff8801134a7ce8 0000000000000000 > > <0> 00000000142d1a3e ffffffff810c2e35 79f085e9c08a4db7 62d38944fd014000 > > <0> 76b07a274b0c057a ffffea00025649f8 f8000000000a168d d19934e84d2a74f3 > > Call Trace: > > [<ffffffff810ce472>] ? page_add_new_anon_rmap+0x72/0xc0 > > [<ffffffff810c2e35>] ? handle_pte_fault+0x7a5/0x7d0 > > [<ffffffff8150506d>] ? do_page_fault+0x13d/0x420 > > [<ffffffff8150215f>] ? page_fault+0x1f/0x30 > > [<ffffffff81273bfb>] ? strnlen_user+0x4b/0x80 > > [<ffffffff81131f4e>] ? load_elf_binary+0x12be/0x1c80 > > [<ffffffff810f426d>] ? search_binary_handler+0xad/0x2c0 > > [<ffffffff810f5ce7>] ? do_execve+0x247/0x320 > > [<ffffffff8100ab16>] ? sys_execve+0x36/0x60 > > [<ffffffff8100314a>] ? stub_execve+0x6a/0xc0 > > Code: 5e ff ff ff 8d 41 01 89 4c 24 08 89 44 24 04 8b 74 24 04 8b 44 24 08 f0 0f b1 32 89 44 24 0c 8b 44 24 0c 39 c8 74 a4 89 c1 eb d1 <0f> 0b eb fe 66 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 41 54 49 89 d4 > > RIP [<ffffffff810e66b0>] migration_entry_wait+0x170/0x180 > > RSP <ffff88009ab6fa58> > > ---[ end trace 840ce8bc6f6dc402 ]--- > > > > It doesn't look like a coincidence the page that had the migration PTE > > set was the argv in the user stack during execve. The bug has to be > > there. Or maybe it's a coincidence and it will mislead us. If you've > > other stack traces please post them so I can have more info (I'll post > > more stack traces if I get them again, it doesn't look easy to > > reproduce, supposedly the bug has always been there since the first > > time I used memory compaction, and this is the first time I reproduce > > it). > > > > The oopses I am getting look very similar. The page is encountered in > the stack while copying the arguements in. I don't think it's a > coincidence. Awesome this is happening in the same page and in the same place! Thanks a lot for sharing your oops (I'm running the same kernel again and I never reproduced it again but I didn't apply the "reproducer" stress to it but only plenty of gcc hugepage loads, I think rebuilding gcc with hugepage-gcc is what triggered it the first time, as gcc takes more memory to build and has a lot more of pathologic cases like translate.o taking lots of memory than the kernel or glibc which I rebuilt a lot recently). Reducing the race to this will help tremendously. If I understand correctly patch 1 didn't fix it (and patch 2 can't be the issue for me as I'm running 2.6.33 anon-vma code). I'll check ASAP if patch 1 is needed even if it's not fixing this bug, or if it's unnecessary, and what else could be wrong... Thanks a lot for the help! Andrea -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>