On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:08 PM, David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
>> > This should be fixed by 9e7814404b77 ("hold task->mempolicy while
>> > numa_maps scans.") in 3.7-rc2, can you reproduce any issues reading
>> > /proc/pid/numa_maps on that kernel?
>>
>> I was actually referring to the warnings Dave Jones saw when fuzzing
>> with trinity after the
>> original patch was applied.
>>
>> I still see the following when fuzzing:
>>
>> [ 338.467156] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
>> kernel/mutex.c:269
>> [ 338.473719] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 6361, name: trinity-main
>> [ 338.481199] 2 locks held by trinity-main/6361:
>> [ 338.486629] #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff810aa314>]
>> __do_page_fault+0x1e4/0x4f0
>> [ 338.498783] #1: (&(&mm->page_table_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at:
>> [<ffffffff8122f017>] handle_pte_fault+0x3f7/0x6a0
>> [ 338.511409] Pid: 6361, comm: trinity-main Tainted: G W
>> 3.7.0-rc2-next-20121024-sasha-00001-gd95ef01-dirty #74
>> [ 338.530318] Call Trace:
>> [ 338.534088] [<ffffffff8114e393>] __might_sleep+0x1c3/0x1e0
>> [ 338.539358] [<ffffffff83ae5209>] mutex_lock_nested+0x29/0x50
>> [ 338.545253] [<ffffffff8124fc3e>] mpol_shared_policy_lookup+0x2e/0x90
>> [ 338.545258] [<ffffffff81219ebe>] shmem_get_policy+0x2e/0x30
>> [ 338.545264] [<ffffffff8124e99a>] get_vma_policy+0x5a/0xa0
>> [ 338.545267] [<ffffffff8124fce1>] mpol_misplaced+0x41/0x1d0
>> [ 338.545272] [<ffffffff8122f085>] handle_pte_fault+0x465/0x6a0
>> [ 338.545278] [<ffffffff81131e04>] ? __rcu_read_unlock+0x44/0xb0
>> [ 338.545282] [<ffffffff81230baa>] handle_mm_fault+0x32a/0x360
>> [ 338.545286] [<ffffffff810aa5b0>] __do_page_fault+0x480/0x4f0
>> [ 338.545293] [<ffffffff8111a706>] ? del_timer+0x26/0x80
>> [ 338.545298] [<ffffffff811c7313>] ? rcu_cleanup_after_idle+0x23/0x170
>> [ 338.545302] [<ffffffff811ca9a4>] ? rcu_eqs_exit_common+0x64/0x3a0
>> [ 338.545305] [<ffffffff811c8c66>] ? rcu_eqs_enter_common+0x7c6/0x970
>> [ 338.545309] [<ffffffff811cafdc>] ? rcu_eqs_exit+0x9c/0xb0
>> [ 338.545312] [<ffffffff810aa666>] do_page_fault+0x26/0x40
>> [ 338.545317] [<ffffffff810a3a40>] do_async_page_fault+0x30/0xa0
>> [ 338.545321] [<ffffffff83ae9268>] async_page_fault+0x28/0x30
>>
>
> Ok, this looks the same but it's actually a different issue:
> mpol_misplaced(), which now only exists in linux-next and not in 3.7-rc2,
> calls get_vma_policy() which may take the shared policy mutex. This
> happens while holding page_table_lock from do_huge_pmd_numa_page() but
> also from do_numa_page() while holding a spinlock on the ptl, which is
> coming from the sched/numa branch.
>
> Is there anyway that we can avoid changing the shared policy mutex back
> into a spinlock (it was converted in b22d127a39dd ["mempolicy: fix a race
> in shared_policy_replace()"])?
>
> Adding Peter, Rik, and Mel to the cc.
Hrm. I haven't noticed there is mpol_misplaced() in linux-next. Peter,
I guess you commited it, right? If so, may I review your mempolicy
changes? Now mempolicy has a lot of horrible buggy code and I hope to
maintain carefully. Which tree should i see?
--
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>