On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 9:26 PM Jaroslav Pulchart
<jaroslav.pulchart@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 4:44 PM Igor Raits <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 12:19 PM Igor Raits <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Jason,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 9:39 AM Igor Raits <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Jason,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 6:31 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 5:44 PM Igor Raits <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello Jason & others,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 10:33 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:15 PM Igor Raits <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hello Stefan,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 2:12 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 10:00:08AM +0100, Igor Raits wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We have started to observe kernel crashes on 6.7.y kernels (atm we
> > > > > > > > > > > have hit the issue 5 times on 6.7.5 and 6.7.10). On 6.6.9 where we
> > > > > > > > > > > have nodes of cluster it looks stable. Please see stacktrace below. If
> > > > > > > > > > > you need more information please let me know.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We do not have a consistent reproducer but when we put some bigger
> > > > > > > > > > > network load on a VM, the hypervisor's kernel crashes.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Help is much appreciated! We are happy to test any patches.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > CCing Michael Tsirkin and Jason Wang for vhost_net.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [62254.167584] stack segment: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI
> > > > > > > > > > > [62254.173450] CPU: 63 PID: 11939 Comm: vhost-11890 Tainted: G
> > > > > > > > > > > E 6.7.10-1.gdc.el9.x86_64 #1
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Are there any patches in this kernel?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Only one, unrelated to this part. Removal of pr_err("EEVDF scheduling
> > > > > > > > > fail, picking leftmost\n"); line (reported somewhere few months ago
> > > > > > > > > and it was suggested workaround until proper solution comes).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Btw, a bisection would help as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In the end it seems like we don't really have "stable" setup, so
> > > > > > > bisection looks to be useless but we did find few things meantime:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. On 6.6.9 it crashes either with unexpected GSO type or usercopy:
> > > > > > > Kernel memory exposure attempt detected from SLUB object
> > > > > > > 'skbuff_head_cache'
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you have a full calltrace for this?
> > > > >
> > > > > I have shared it in one of the messages in this thread.
> > > > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-virtualization&m=171085443512001&w=2
> > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. On 6.7.5, 6.7.10 and 6.8.1 it crashes with RIP:
> > > > > > > 0010:skb_release_data+0xb8/0x1e0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And for this?
> > > > >
> > > > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=171083870801761&w=2
> > > > >
> > > > > > > 3. It does NOT crash on 6.8.1 when VM does not have multi-queue setup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Looks like the multi-queue setup (we have 2 interfaces × 3 virtio
> > > > > > > queues for each) is causing problems as if we set only one queue for
> > > > > > > each interface the issue is gone.
> > > > > > > Maybe there is some race condition in __pfx_vhost_task_fn+0x10/0x10 or
> > > > > > > somewhere around?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I can't tell now, but it seems not because if we have 3 queue pairs we
> > > > > > will have 3 vhost threads.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We have noticed that there are 3 of such functions
> > > > > > > in the stacktrace that gave us hints about what we could try…
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's try to enable SLUB_DEBUG and KASAN to see if we can get
> > > > > > something interesting.
> > > > >
> > > > > We were able to reproduce it even with 1 vhost queue... And now we
> > > > > have slub_debug + kasan so I hopefully have more useful data for you
> > > > > now.
> > > > > I have attached it for better readability.
> > > >
> > > > Looks like we have found a "stable" kernel and that is 6.1.32. The
> > > > 6.3.y is broken and we are testing 6.2.y now.
> > > > My guess it would be related to virtio/vsock: replace virtio_vsock_pkt
> > > > with sk_buff that was done around that time but we are going to test,
> > > > bisect and let you know more.
> > >
> > > So we have been trying to bisect it but it is basically impossible for
> > > us to do so as the ICE driver was quite broken for most of the release
> > > cycle so we have no networking on 99% of the builds and we can't test
> > > such a setup.
> > > More specifically, the bug was introduced between 6.2 and 6.3 but we
> > > could not get much further. The last good commit we were able to test
> > > was f18f9845f2f10d3d1fc63e4ad16ee52d2d9292fa and then after 20 commits
> > > where we had no networking we gave up.
> > >
> > > If you have some suspicious commit(s) we could revert - happy to test.
> >
> > Here is the is for the change since f18f9845f2f10d3d1fc63e4ad16ee52d2d9292fa:
> >
> > cbfbfe3aee71 tun: prevent negative ifindex
> > b2f8323364ab tun: add __exit annotations to module exit func tun_cleanup()
> > 6231e47b6fad tun: avoid high-order page allocation for packet header
> > 4d016ae42efb Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net
> > 59eeb2329405 drivers: net: prevent tun_build_skb() to exceed the
> > packet size limit
> > 35b1b1fd9638 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net
> > ce7c7fef1473 net: tun: change tun_alloc_skb() to allow bigger paged allocations
> > 9bc3047374d5 net: tun_chr_open(): set sk_uid from current_fsuid()
> > 82b2bc279467 tun: Fix memory leak for detached NAPI queue.
> > 6e98b09da931 Merge tag 'net-next-6.4' of
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next
> > de4f5fed3f23 iov_iter: add iter_iovec() helper
> > 438b406055cd tun: flag the device as supporting FMODE_NOWAIT
> > de4287336794 Daniel Borkmann says:
> > a096ccca6e50 tun: tun_chr_open(): correctly initialize socket uid
> > 66c0e13ad236 drivers: net: turn on XDP features
> >
> > The commit that touches the datapath are:
> >
> > 6231e47b6fad tun: avoid high-order page allocation for packet header
> > 59eeb2329405 drivers: net: prevent tun_build_skb() to exceed the
> > packet size limit
> > ce7c7fef1473 net: tun: change tun_alloc_skb() to allow bigger paged allocations
> > 82b2bc279467 tun: Fix memory leak for detached NAPI queue.
> > de4f5fed3f23 iov_iter: add iter_iovec() helper
> >
> > I assume you didn't use NAPI mode, so 82b2bc279467 tun: Fix memory
> > leak for detached NAPI queue doesn't make sense for us.
> >
> > The rest might be the bad commit if it is caused by a change of tun itself.
> >
> > btw I vaguely remember KASAN will report who did the allocation and
> > who did the free. But it seems not in your KASAN log.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks again.
> > >
> >
>
> Hello
>
> We have one observation. The occurrence of the error depends on the
> ring buffer size of physical network cards. We have two E810 Intel
> cards bonded by two interfaces (em1 + p3p2, ice driver) into single
> bon0. The bond0 is then linux bridged and/or ovs(witched) to VMs via
> tun interfaces (both switch solutions have the same problem). VMs are
> qemu-kvm instances and using vhost/virtio-net.
>
> We see:
> 1/ The issue is triggered almost instantaneously when tx/rx ring
> buffer is set to 2048 (our default)
> ethtool -G em1 rx 2048 tx 2048
> ethtool -G p3p1 rx 2048 tx 2048
>
> 2/ Similar issue is triggered when the tx/rx ring buffer is set to
> 4096: the host does not crash immediately, but some trace is shown
> soon and later it gets into memory pressure and crashes.
This is probably a hint of memory leak somewhere.
> ethtool -G em1 rx 4096 tx 4096
> ethtool -G p3p1 rx 4096 tx 4096
> See attached ring_4096.kasan.txt (vanila 6.8.1 with enabled KASAN) and
> ring_4096.txt (vanila 6.8.1 without kasan)
>
> 3/ The system is stable or we just can-not trigger the issue if the
> ring buffer is >= 6144.
> ethtool -G em1 rx 7120 tx 7120
> ethtool -G p3p1 rx 7120 tx 7120
>
> could it be influenced by a some rate of dropped packets in the ring buffer?
I can't tell.
Btw, it looks like the logs were cut off. Could we get a full log?
Thanks
>
> # for i in em1 p3p1; do ethtool -S ${i} | grep dropped.nic; done
> rx_dropped.nic: 158225
> rx_dropped.nic: 74285
>
> Best,
> Jaroslav Pulchart
