On 03/06/2018 11:40 PM, Pavel Tatashin wrote: > Robot reported this issue: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/27/851 > > That is introduced by: > mm: initialize pages on demand during boot > > The problem is caused by changing static branch value within spin lock. > Spin lock disables preemption, and changing static branch value takes > mutex lock in its path, and thus may sleep. > > The fix is to add another boolean variable to avoid the need to change > static branch within spinlock. > > Also, as noticed by Andrew, change spin_lock to spin_lock_irq, in order > to disable interrupts and avoid possible deadlock with > deferred_grow_zone(). > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > mm/page_alloc.c | 12 +++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c > index b337a026007c..5df1ca40a2ff 100644 > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c > @@ -1579,6 +1579,7 @@ static int __init deferred_init_memmap(void *data) > * page_alloc_init_late() soon after smp_init() is complete. > */ > static __initdata DEFINE_SPINLOCK(deferred_zone_grow_lock); > +static bool deferred_zone_grow __initdata = true; > static DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_TRUE(deferred_pages); > > /* > @@ -1616,7 +1617,7 @@ deferred_grow_zone(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order) > * Bail if we raced with another thread that disabled on demand > * initialization. > */ > - if (!static_branch_unlikely(&deferred_pages)) { > + if (!static_branch_unlikely(&deferred_pages) || !deferred_zone_grow) { > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&deferred_zone_grow_lock, flags); > return false; > } > @@ -1683,10 +1684,15 @@ void __init page_alloc_init_late(void) > /* > * We are about to initialize the rest of deferred pages, permanently > * disable on-demand struct page initialization. Hi, I've noticed that this function first disables the on-demand initialization, and then runs the kthreads. Doesn't that leave a window where allocations can fail? The chances are probably small, but I think it would be better to avoid it completely, rare failures suck. Fixing that probably means rethinking the whole synchronization more dramatically though :/ Vlastimil > + * > + * Note: it is prohibited to modify static branches in non-preemptible > + * context. Since, spin_lock() disables preemption, we must use an > + * extra boolean deferred_zone_grow. > */ > - spin_lock(&deferred_zone_grow_lock); > + spin_lock_irq(&deferred_zone_grow_lock); > + deferred_zone_grow = false; > + spin_unlock_irq(&deferred_zone_grow_lock); > static_branch_disable(&deferred_pages); > - spin_unlock(&deferred_zone_grow_lock); > > /* There will be num_node_state(N_MEMORY) threads */ > atomic_set(&pgdat_init_n_undone, num_node_state(N_MEMORY)); > -- 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>
