> On Apr 24, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The following lockdep splat was reported:
>
> [ 176.241923] ======================================================
> [ 176.241924] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 176.241926] 4.18.0-172.rt13.29.el8.x86_64+debug #1 Not tainted
> [ 176.241927] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 176.241929] slub_cpu_partia/5371 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 176.241930] ffffffffa0b83718 (slab_mutex){+.+.}, at: slab_attr_store+0x6b/0xe0
> [ 176.241941]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 176.241942] ffff88bb6d8b83c8 (kn->count#103){++++}, at: kernfs_fop_write+0x1cc/0x400
> [ 176.241947]
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> [ 176.241949]
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 176.241949]
> -> #1 (kn->count#103){++++}:
> [ 176.241955] __kernfs_remove+0x616/0x800
> [ 176.241957] kernfs_remove_by_name_ns+0x3e/0x80
> [ 176.241959] sysfs_slab_add+0x1c6/0x330
> [ 176.241961] __kmem_cache_create+0x15f/0x1b0
> [ 176.241964] create_cache+0xe1/0x220
> [ 176.241966] kmem_cache_create_usercopy+0x1a3/0x260
> [ 176.241967] kmem_cache_create+0x12/0x20
> [ 176.242076] mlx5_init_fs+0x18d/0x1a00 [mlx5_core]
> [ 176.242100] mlx5_load_one+0x3b4/0x1730 [mlx5_core]
> [ 176.242124] init_one+0x901/0x11b0 [mlx5_core]
> [ 176.242127] local_pci_probe+0xd4/0x180
> [ 176.242131] work_for_cpu_fn+0x51/0xa0
> [ 176.242133] process_one_work+0x91a/0x1ac0
> [ 176.242134] worker_thread+0x536/0xb40
> [ 176.242136] kthread+0x30c/0x3d0
> [ 176.242140] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x50
> [ 176.242140]
> -> #0 (slab_mutex){+.+.}:
> [ 176.242145] __lock_acquire+0x22cb/0x48c0
> [ 176.242146] lock_acquire+0x134/0x4c0
> [ 176.242148] _mutex_lock+0x28/0x40
> [ 176.242150] slab_attr_store+0x6b/0xe0
> [ 176.242151] kernfs_fop_write+0x251/0x400
> [ 176.242154] vfs_write+0x157/0x460
> [ 176.242155] ksys_write+0xb8/0x170
> [ 176.242158] do_syscall_64+0x13c/0x710
> [ 176.242160] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6a/0xdf
> [ 176.242161]
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> [ 176.242161] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 176.242162] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 176.242163] ---- ----
> [ 176.242163] lock(kn->count#103);
> [ 176.242165] lock(slab_mutex);
> [ 176.242166] lock(kn->count#103);
> [ 176.242167] lock(slab_mutex);
> [ 176.242169]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 176.242170] 3 locks held by slub_cpu_partia/5371:
> [ 176.242170] #0: ffff888705e3a800 (sb_writers#4){.+.+}, at: vfs_write+0x31c/0x460
> [ 176.242174] #1: ffff889aeec4d658 (&of->mutex){+.+.}, at: kernfs_fop_write+0x1a9/0x400
> [ 176.242177] #2: ffff88bb6d8b83c8 (kn->count#103){++++}, at: kernfs_fop_write+0x1cc/0x400
> [ 176.242180]
> stack backtrace:
> [ 176.242183] CPU: 36 PID: 5371 Comm: slub_cpu_partia Not tainted 4.18.0-172.rt13.29.el8.x86_64+debug #1
> [ 176.242184] Hardware name: AMD Corporation DAYTONA_X/DAYTONA_X, BIOS RDY1005C 11/22/2019
> [ 176.242185] Call Trace:
> [ 176.242190] dump_stack+0x9a/0xf0
> [ 176.242193] check_noncircular+0x317/0x3c0
> [ 176.242195] ? print_circular_bug+0x1e0/0x1e0
> [ 176.242199] ? native_sched_clock+0x32/0x1e0
> [ 176.242202] ? sched_clock+0x5/0x10
> [ 176.242205] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x238/0x340
> [ 176.242208] __lock_acquire+0x22cb/0x48c0
> [ 176.242213] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x10/0x10
> [ 176.242215] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x10/0x10
> [ 176.242218] lock_acquire+0x134/0x4c0
> [ 176.242220] ? slab_attr_store+0x6b/0xe0
> [ 176.242223] _mutex_lock+0x28/0x40
> [ 176.242225] ? slab_attr_store+0x6b/0xe0
> [ 176.242227] slab_attr_store+0x6b/0xe0
> [ 176.242229] ? sysfs_file_ops+0x160/0x160
> [ 176.242230] kernfs_fop_write+0x251/0x400
> [ 176.242232] ? __sb_start_write+0x26a/0x3f0
> [ 176.242234] vfs_write+0x157/0x460
> [ 176.242237] ksys_write+0xb8/0x170
> [ 176.242239] ? __ia32_sys_read+0xb0/0xb0
> [ 176.242242] ? do_syscall_64+0xb9/0x710
> [ 176.242245] do_syscall_64+0x13c/0x710
> [ 176.242247] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6a/0xdf
>
> There was another lockdep splat generated by echoing "1" to
> "/sys/kernel/slab/fs_cache/shrink":
>
> [ 445.231443] Chain exists of:
> cpu_hotplug_lock --> mem_hotplug_lock --> slab_mutex
>
> [ 445.242025] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 445.247977] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 445.252529] ---- ----
> [ 445.257082] lock(slab_mutex);
> [ 445.260239] lock(mem_hotplug_lock);
> [ 445.266452] lock(slab_mutex);
> [ 445.272141] lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
>
> So it is problematic to use slab_mutex to iterate the list of
> child memcgs with for_each_memcg_cache(). Fortunately, there is
> another way to do child memcg iteration by going through the array
> entries in memcg_params.memcg_caches while holding a read lock on
> memcg_cache_ids_sem.
>
> To avoid other possible circular locking problems, we only take a
> reference to the child memcgs and store their addresses while holding
> memcg_cache_ids_sem. The actual store method is called for each of the
> child memcgs after releasing the lock.
Even on x86 where it compiles, this patch is insufficient to prevent a lockdep splat,
because there are still cpu_hotplug_lock and mem_hotplug_lock in the way.
[ 290.738690] ======================================================
[ 290.744908] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 290.751134] 5.7.0-rc2-next-20200424+ #12 Not tainted
[ 290.756132] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 290.762611] bash/1798 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 290.767262] ffffffff89917890 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: kmem_cache_shrink+0x12/0x40
[ 290.775770]
[ 290.775770] but task is already holding lock:
[ 290.781641] ffff8887f2fbc830 (kn->count#86){++++}-{0:0}, at: kernfs_fop_write+0x105/0x250
[ 290.790061]
[ 290.790061] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[ 290.790061]
[ 290.798289]
[ 290.798289] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 290.805818]
[ 290.805818] -> #3 (kn->count#86){++++}-{0:0}:
[ 290.811954] __kernfs_remove+0x455/0x4c0
[ 290.816428] kernfs_remove+0x23/0x40
[ 290.820554] sysfs_remove_dir+0x74/0x80
[ 290.824947] kobject_del+0x57/0xa0
[ 290.828905] sysfs_slab_unlink+0x1c/0x20
[ 290.833377] shutdown_cache+0x15d/0x1c0
[ 290.837964] kmemcg_cache_shutdown_fn+0xe/0x20
[ 290.842963] kmemcg_workfn+0x35/0x50
[ 290.847095] process_one_work+0x57e/0xb90
[ 290.851658] worker_thread+0x63/0x5b0
[ 290.855872] kthread+0x1f7/0x220
[ 290.859653] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x50
[ 290.864042]
[ 290.864042] -> #2 (slab_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
[ 290.869747] __mutex_lock+0x12f/0xca0
[ 290.873960] mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[ 290.878434] memcg_create_kmem_cache+0x2e/0x190
[ 290.883523] memcg_kmem_cache_create_func+0x38/0x190
[ 290.889274] process_one_work+0x57e/0xb90
[ 290.893838] worker_thread+0x63/0x5b0
[ 290.898050] kthread+0x1f7/0x220
[ 290.901828] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x50
[ 290.905953]
[ 290.905953] -> #1 (mem_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
[ 290.912384] get_online_mems+0x3e/0xc0
[ 290.916682] kmem_cache_create_usercopy+0x32/0x270
[ 290.922030] kmem_cache_create+0x16/0x20
[ 290.926507] kmemleak_init+0x4a/0xf4
[ 290.930640] start_kernel+0x52a/0x8bb
[ 290.935109] x86_64_start_reservations+0x24/0x26
[ 290.940291] x86_64_start_kernel+0xf4/0xfb
[ 290.944942] secondary_startup_64+0xb6/0xc0
[ 290.949677]
[ 290.949677] -> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
[ 290.955906] __lock_acquire+0x21f8/0x3260
[ 290.960751] lock_acquire+0x1a2/0x680
[ 290.964966] cpus_read_lock+0x3e/0xc0
[ 290.969176] kmem_cache_shrink+0x12/0x40
[ 290.973650] shrink_store+0x17/0x30
[ 290.977687] slab_attr_store+0x4d/0x3c0
[ 290.982076] sysfs_kf_write+0x89/0xb0
[ 290.986473] kernfs_fop_write+0x155/0x250
[ 290.991041] __vfs_write+0x50/0xa0
[ 290.994990] vfs_write+0x10b/0x290
[ 290.998942] ksys_write+0xcc/0x170
[ 291.002893] __x64_sys_write+0x43/0x50
[ 291.007193] do_syscall_64+0xcc/0xaf0
[ 291.011600] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xb3
[ 291.017208]
[ 291.017208] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 291.017208]
[ 291.025262] Chain exists of:
[ 291.025262] cpu_hotplug_lock --> slab_mutex --> kn->count#86
[ 291.025262]
[ 291.035683] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 291.035683]
[ 291.041639] CPU0 CPU1
[ 291.046200] ---- ----
[ 291.050762] lock(kn->count#86);
[ 291.054101] lock(slab_mutex);
[ 291.060132] lock(kn->count#86);
[ 291.066018] lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
[ 291.069707]
[ 291.069707] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 291.069707]
[ 291.075666] 3 locks held by bash/1798:
[ 291.079443] #0: ffff88832e091430 (sb_writers#4){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: vfs_write+0x262/0x290
[ 291.087711] #1: ffff888784670288 (&of->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: kernfs_fop_write+0xf5/0x250
[ 291.096119] #2: ffff8887f2fbc830 (kn->count#86){++++}-{0:0}, at: kernfs_fop_write+0x105/0x250
[ 291.104788]
[ 291.104788] stack backtrace:
[ 291.109181] CPU: 14 PID: 1798 Comm: bash Not tainted 5.7.0-rc2-next-20200424+ #12
[ 291.116940] Hardware name: HPE ProLiant DL385 Gen10/ProLiant DL385 Gen10, BIOS A40 03/09/2018
[ 291.125517] Call Trace:
[ 291.127990] dump_stack+0xa7/0xea
[ 291.131328] print_circular_bug.cold.54+0x147/0x14c
[ 291.136463] check_noncircular+0x295/0x2d0
[ 291.140586] ? print_circular_bug+0x1d0/0x1d0
[ 291.144974] ? __kasan_check_read+0x11/0x20
[ 291.149188] ? mark_lock+0x160/0xfe0
[ 291.152792] __lock_acquire+0x21f8/0x3260
[ 291.156830] ? register_lock_class+0xb90/0xb90
[ 291.161534] ? register_lock_class+0xb90/0xb90
[ 291.166012] ? check_flags.part.28+0x220/0x220
[ 291.170489] lock_acquire+0x1a2/0x680
[ 291.174178] ? kmem_cache_shrink+0x12/0x40
[ 291.178306] ? check_flags.part.28+0x220/0x220
[ 291.182784] ? ___might_sleep+0x178/0x210
[ 291.187021] cpus_read_lock+0x3e/0xc0
[ 291.190709] ? kmem_cache_shrink+0x12/0x40
[ 291.194832] kmem_cache_shrink+0x12/0x40
[ 291.198781] shrink_store+0x17/0x30
[ 291.202294] slab_attr_store+0x4d/0x3c0
[ 291.206159] ? kernfs_get_active+0x136/0x150
[ 291.210663] ? objects_show+0x20/0x20
[ 291.214349] sysfs_kf_write+0x89/0xb0
[ 291.218038] ? sysfs_file_ops+0xa0/0xa0
[ 291.221898] kernfs_fop_write+0x155/0x250
[ 291.225936] __vfs_write+0x50/0xa0
[ 291.229364] vfs_write+0x10b/0x290
[ 291.232790] ksys_write+0xcc/0x170
[ 291.236405] ? __x64_sys_read+0x50/0x50
[ 291.240270] ? do_syscall_64+0x79/0xaf0
[ 291.244132] ? do_syscall_64+0x79/0xaf0
[ 291.247998] __x64_sys_write+0x43/0x50
[ 291.251776] do_syscall_64+0xcc/0xaf0
[ 291.255464] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x1a/0x1c
[ 291.260396] ? syscall_return_slowpath+0x580/0x580
[ 291.265223] ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x3e/0xb3
[ 291.270491] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x3a/0x150
[ 291.275400] ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x1c
[ 291.280137] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xb3
[ 291.285443] RIP: 0033:0x7f2c0d9adb28
[ 291.289046] Code: 89 02 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff eb b3 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 48 8d 05 35 4b 2d 00 8b 00 85 c0 75 17 b8 01 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 58 c3 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 41 54 49 89 d4 55
[ 291.307931] RSP: 002b:00007ffccc6e3898 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000001
[ 291.315804] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000002 RCX: 00007f2c0d9adb28
[ 291.322985] RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: 000055d97c790de0 RDI: 0000000000000001
[ 291.330164] RBP: 000055d97c790de0 R08: 000000000000000a R09: 00007f2c0da3ec80
[ 291.337537] R10: 000000000000000a R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007f2c0dc7e6c0
[ 291.344718] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00007f2c0dc79880 R15: 0000000000000002
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/slub.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index 183ccc364ccf..255981180489 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -5567,13 +5567,30 @@ static ssize_t slab_attr_store(struct kobject *kobj,
> return -EIO;
>
> err = attribute->store(s, buf, len);
> -#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> - if (slab_state >= FULL && err >= 0 && is_root_cache(s)) {
> - struct kmem_cache *c;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
> + if (slab_state >= FULL && err >= 0 && is_root_cache(s) &&
> + !list_empty(&s->memcg_params.children)) {
> + struct kmem_cache *c, **pcaches;
> + int idx, max, cnt = 0;
> + size_t size = s->max_attr_size;
> + struct memcg_cache_array *arr;
> +
> + /*
> + * Make atomic update to s->max_attr_size.
> + */
> + do {
> + if (len <= size)
> + break;
> + } while (!try_cmpxchg(&s->max_attr_size, &size, len));
>
> - mutex_lock(&slab_mutex);
> - if (s->max_attr_size < len)
> - s->max_attr_size = len;
> + memcg_get_cache_ids();
> + max = memcg_nr_cache_ids;
> +
> + pcaches = kmalloc_array(max, sizeof(void *), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!pcaches) {
> + memcg_put_cache_ids();
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
>
> /*
> * This is a best effort propagation, so this function's return
> @@ -5591,10 +5608,33 @@ static ssize_t slab_attr_store(struct kobject *kobj,
> * has well defined semantics. The cache being written to
> * directly either failed or succeeded, in which case we loop
> * through the descendants with best-effort propagation.
> + *
> + * To avoid potential circular lock dependency problems, we
> + * just get a reference and store child cache pointers while
> + * holding the memcg_cache_ids_sem read lock. The store
> + * method is then called for each child cache after releasing
> + * the lock. Code sequence partly borrowed from
> + * memcg_kmem_get_cache().
> */
> - for_each_memcg_cache(c, s)
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + arr = rcu_dereference(s->memcg_params.memcg_caches);
> + for (idx = 0; idx < max; idx++) {
> + c = READ_ONCE(arr->entries[idx]);
> + if (!c)
> + continue;
> + if (!percpu_ref_tryget(&c->memcg_params.refcnt))
> + continue;
> + pcaches[cnt++] = c;
> + }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + memcg_put_cache_ids();
> +
> + for (idx = 0; idx < cnt; idx++) {
> + c = pcaches[idx];
> attribute->store(c, buf, len);
> - mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);
> + percpu_ref_put(&c->memcg_params.refcnt);
> + }
> + kfree(pcaches);
> }
> #endif
> return err;
> --
> 2.18.1
>
>
