Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:47:20PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 02:55:28PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > This warning seems to be caused by commit d92a8cfcb37ecd13
> > > > ("locking/lockdep: Rework FS_RECLAIM annotation") which moved the
> > > > location of
> > > >
> > > > /* this guy won't enter reclaim */
> > > > if ((current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC))
> > > > return false;
> > > >
> > > > check added by commit cf40bd16fdad42c0 ("lockdep: annotate reclaim context
> > > > (__GFP_NOFS)").
> > >
> > > I'm not entirly sure I get what you mean here. How did I move it? It was
> > > part of lockdep_trace_alloc(), if __GFP_NOMEMALLOC was set, it would not
> > > mark the lock as held.
> >
> > d92a8cfcb37ecd13 replaced lockdep_set_current_reclaim_state() with
> > fs_reclaim_acquire(), and removed current->lockdep_recursion handling.
> >
> > ----------
> > # git show d92a8cfcb37ecd13 | grep recursion
> > -# define INIT_LOCKDEP .lockdep_recursion = 0, .lockdep_reclaim_gfp = 0,
> > +# define INIT_LOCKDEP .lockdep_recursion = 0,
> > unsigned int lockdep_recursion;
> > - if (unlikely(current->lockdep_recursion))
> > - current->lockdep_recursion = 1;
> > - current->lockdep_recursion = 0;
> > - * context checking code. This tests GFP_FS recursion (a lock taken
> > ----------
>
> That should not matter at all. The only case that would matter for is if
> lockdep itself would ever call into lockdep again. Not something that
> happens here.
>
> > > The new code has it in fs_reclaim_acquire/release to the same effect, if
> > > __GFP_NOMEMALLOC, we'll not acquire/release the lock.
> >
> > Excuse me, but I can't catch.
> > We currently acquire/release __fs_reclaim_map if __GFP_NOMEMALLOC.
>
> Right, got the case inverted, same difference though. Before we'd do
> mark_held_lock(), now we do acquire/release under the same conditions.
>
> > > > Since __kmalloc_reserve() from __alloc_skb() adds
> > > > __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN to gfp_mask, __need_fs_reclaim() is
> > > > failing to return false despite PF_MEMALLOC context (and resulted in
> > > > lockdep warning).
> > >
> > > But that's correct right, __GFP_NOMEMALLOC should negate PF_MEMALLOC.
> > > That's what the name says.
> >
> > __GFP_NOMEMALLOC negates PF_MEMALLOC regarding what watermark that allocation
> > request should use.
>
> Right.
>
> > But at the same time, PF_MEMALLOC negates __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
>
> Ah indeed.
>
> > Then, how can fs_reclaim contribute to deadlock?
>
> Not sure it can. But if we're going to allow this, it needs to come with
> a clear description on why. Not a few clues to a puzzle.
>
Let's decode Dave's report.
----------
stack backtrace:
CPU: 3 PID: 24800 Comm: sshd Not tainted 4.15.0-rc9-backup-debug+ #1
Call Trace:
dump_stack+0xbc/0x13f
__lock_acquire+0xa09/0x2040
lock_acquire+0x12e/0x350
fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x29/0x30
kmem_cache_alloc+0x3d/0x2c0
alloc_extent_state+0xa7/0x410
__clear_extent_bit+0x3ea/0x570
try_release_extent_mapping+0x21a/0x260
__btrfs_releasepage+0xb0/0x1c0
btrfs_releasepage+0x161/0x170
try_to_release_page+0x162/0x1c0
shrink_page_list+0x1d5a/0x2fb0
shrink_inactive_list+0x451/0x940
shrink_node_memcg.constprop.88+0x4c9/0x5e0
shrink_node+0x12d/0x260
try_to_free_pages+0x418/0xaf0
__alloc_pages_slowpath+0x976/0x1790
__alloc_pages_nodemask+0x52c/0x5c0
new_slab+0x374/0x3f0
___slab_alloc.constprop.81+0x47e/0x5a0
__slab_alloc.constprop.80+0x32/0x60
__kmalloc_track_caller+0x267/0x310
__kmalloc_reserve.isra.40+0x29/0x80
__alloc_skb+0xee/0x390
sk_stream_alloc_skb+0xb8/0x340
----------
struct sk_buff *sk_stream_alloc_skb(struct sock *sk, int size, gfp_t gfp, bool force_schedule) {
skb = alloc_skb_fclone(size + sk->sk_prot->max_header, gfp) = { // gfp == GFP_KERNEL
static inline struct sk_buff *alloc_skb_fclone(unsigned int size, gfp_t priority) { // priority == GFP_KERNEL
return __alloc_skb(size, priority, SKB_ALLOC_FCLONE, NUMA_NO_NODE) = {
data = kmalloc_reserve(size, gfp_mask, node, &pfmemalloc) = { // gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL
obj = kmalloc_node_track_caller(size, flags | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN, node) = { // flags == GFP_KERNEL
__kmalloc_node_track_caller(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN, node) = {
void *__kmalloc_node_track_caller(size_t size, gfp_t gfpflags, int node, unsigned long caller) { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
ret = slab_alloc_node(s, gfpflags, node, caller) = { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
static __always_inline void *slab_alloc_node(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t gfpflags, int node, unsigned long addr) { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
s = slab_pre_alloc_hook(s, gfpflags) = { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
static inline struct kmem_cache *slab_pre_alloc_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags) { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
fs_reclaim_acquire(flags) = { // flags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
void fs_reclaim_acquire(gfp_t gfp_mask) { // gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
if (__need_fs_reclaim(gfp_mask)) // true due to gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC
lock_map_acquire(&__fs_reclaim_map); // acquires __fs_reclaim_map
}
}
}
fs_reclaim_release(flags); // releases __fs_reclaim_map
}
object = __slab_alloc(s, gfpflags, node, addr, c) = { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
p = ___slab_alloc(s, gfpflags, node, addr, c) = { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
freelist = new_slab_objects(s, gfpflags, node, &c) = {
page = new_slab(s, flags, node) = { // flags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
return allocate_slab(s, flags & (GFP_RECLAIM_MASK | GFP_CONSTRAINT_MASK), node) = {
page = alloc_slab_page(s, alloc_gfp, node, oo) = { // alloc_gfp == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
page = alloc_pages(flags, order) { // flags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
return alloc_pages_current(gfp_mask, order) = { //gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
page = __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp, order, policy_node(gfp, pol, numa_node_id()), policy_nodemask(gfp, pol)) = { // gfp == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
page = __alloc_pages_slowpath(alloc_mask, order, &ac) = { // alloc_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
page = __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(gfp_mask, order, alloc_flags, ac, &did_some_progress) = { // gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
*did_some_progress = __perform_reclaim(gfp_mask, order, ac) = { // gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
noreclaim_flag = memalloc_noreclaim_save(); // Sets PF_MEMALLOC
fs_reclaim_acquire(flags) = { // flags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
void fs_reclaim_acquire(gfp_t gfp_mask) { // gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
if (__need_fs_reclaim(gfp_mask)) // true due to gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC
lock_map_acquire(&__fs_reclaim_map); // acquires __fs_reclaim_map
}
}
progress = try_to_free_pages(ac->zonelist, order, gfp_mask, ac->nodemask) = {
nr_reclaimed = do_try_to_free_pages(zonelist, &sc) = {
shrink_zones(zonelist, sc) = {
shrink_node(zone->zone_pgdat, sc) = {
shrink_node_memcg(pgdat, memcg, sc, &lru_pages) = {
nr_reclaimed += shrink_list(lru, nr_to_scan, lruvec, memcg, sc) = {
return shrink_inactive_list(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, lru) = {
nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, pgdat, sc, 0, &stat, false) = {
if (!try_to_release_page(page, sc->gfp_mask))
goto activate_locked = {
return mapping->a_ops->releasepage(page, gfp_mask) = {
static int btrfs_releasepage(struct page *page, gfp_t gfp_flags) { // gfp_flags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
return __btrfs_releasepage(page, gfp_flags) = {
ret = try_release_extent_mapping(map, tree, page, gfp_flags) = {
return try_release_extent_state(map, tree, page, mask) = { // mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
ret = clear_extent_bit(tree, start, end, ~(EXTENT_LOCKED | EXTENT_NODATASUM), 0, 0, NULL, mask) = {
return __clear_extent_bit(tree, start, end, bits, wake, delete, cached, mask, NULL) = {
prealloc = alloc_extent_state(mask) = {
state = kmem_cache_alloc(extent_state_cache, mask) = {
void *ret = slab_alloc(s, gfpflags, _RET_IP_) = { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
return slab_alloc_node(s, gfpflags, NUMA_NO_NODE, addr) = {
s = slab_pre_alloc_hook(s, gfpflags) = {
static inline struct kmem_cache *slab_pre_alloc_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags) { // gfpflags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
fs_reclaim_acquire(flags) = { // flags == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
void fs_reclaim_acquire(gfp_t gfp_mask) { // gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN
if (__need_fs_reclaim(gfp_mask)) // true due to gfp_mask == GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC despite PF_MEMALLOC
lock_map_acquire(&__fs_reclaim_map); // acquires __fs_reclaim_map nestedly and lockdep complains
}
}
}
fs_reclaim_release(flags); // releases __fs_reclaim_map
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
That is, all reclaim code is simply propagating __GFP_NOMEMALLOC added by kmalloc_reserve(), and
despite memory allocation from try_to_free_pages() path won't do direct reclaim due to PF_MEMALLOC,
fs_reclaim_acquire() from slab_pre_alloc_hook() from try_to_free_pages() path is failing to find that
this allocation will not do direct reclaim due to PF_MEMALLOC (due to
/* this guy won't enter reclaim */
if ((current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC))
return false;
check in __need_fs_reclaim()).
After all, nested GFP_FS allocations cannot occur (whatever GFP flags are passed)
because such allocation will not do direct reclaim due to PF_MEMALLOC.
> Now, even if its not strictly a deadlock, there is something to be said
> for flagging GFP_FS allocs that lead to nested GFP_FS allocs, do we ever
> want to allow that?
Since PF_MEMALLOC negates __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM, propagating unmodified GFP flags
(like above) is safe as long as dependency is within current thread.
So, how to fix this?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
