On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 04:54:09PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 03:35:12PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Fri 23-09-22 12:38:58, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > > > > Martin Zaharinov reports BUG() in mm land for 5.19.10 kernel:
> > > > > kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c:2437!
> > > > > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
> > > > > CPU: 28 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/28 Tainted: G W O 5.19.9 #1
> > > > > [..]
> > > > > RIP: 0010:__get_vm_area_node+0x120/0x130
> > > > > __vmalloc_node_range+0x96/0x1e0
> > > > > kvmalloc_node+0x92/0xb0
> > > > > bucket_table_alloc.isra.0+0x47/0x140
> > > > > rhashtable_try_insert+0x3a4/0x440
> > > > > rhashtable_insert_slow+0x1b/0x30
> > > > > [..]
> > > > >
> > > > > bucket_table_alloc uses kvzallocGPF_ATOMIC). If kmalloc fails, this now
> > > > > falls through to vmalloc and hits code paths that assume GFP_KERNEL.
> > > > >
> > > > > Revert the problematic change and stay with slab allocator.
> > > >
> > > > Why don't you simply fix the caller?
> > >
> > > Uh, not following?
> > >
> > > kvzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) was perfectly fine, is this illegal again?
> > >
> > <snip>
> > static struct vm_struct *__get_vm_area_node(unsigned long size,
> > unsigned long align, unsigned long shift, unsigned long flags,
> > unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int node,
> > gfp_t gfp_mask, const void *caller)
> > {
> > struct vmap_area *va;
> > struct vm_struct *area;
> > unsigned long requested_size = size;
> >
> > BUG_ON(in_interrupt());
> > ...
> > <snip>
> >
> > vmalloc is not supposed to be called from the IRQ context.
>
> It uses kvzalloc, not vmalloc api.
>
> Before 2018, rhashtable did use kzalloc OR kvzalloc, depending on gfp_t.
>
> Quote from 93f976b5190df327939 changelog:
> As of ce91f6ee5b3b ("mm: kvmalloc does not fallback to vmalloc for
> incompatible gfp flags") we can simplify the caller
> and trust kvzalloc() to just do the right thing.
>
> I fear that if this isn't allowed it will result in hard-to-spot bugs
> because things will work fine until a fallback to vmalloc happens.
>
> rhashtable may not be the only user of kvmalloc api that rely on
> ability to call it from (soft)irq.
>
Doing the "p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), GFP_ATOMIC);" from an atomic context
is also a problem nowadays. Such code should be fixed across the kernel
because of PREEMPT_RT support.
--
Uladzislau Rezki
