From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: cpu stopper threads and load balancing leads to deadlock
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 07:39:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180503143941.GH26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180503135617.GC12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:56:17PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:32:39PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > Dang. With $subject fix applied as well..
>
> That's a NO then... :-(
>
> > [ 151.103732] smpboot: Booting Node 0 Processor 2 APIC 0x4
> > [ 151.104908] =============================
> > [ 151.104909] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> > [ 151.104910] 4.17.0.g66d489e-tip-default #84 Tainted: G E
> > [ 151.104911] -----------------------------
> > [ 151.104912] kernel/sched/core.c:1625 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> > [ 151.104913]
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > [ 151.104914]
> > RCU used illegally from offline CPU!
> > rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 0
> > [ 151.104916] 3 locks held by swapper/2/0:
> > [ 151.104916] #0: 00000000560adb60 (stop_cpus_mutex){+.+.}, at: stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu+0x86/0x140
> > [ 151.104923] #1: 00000000e4fb0238 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}, at: try_to_wake_up+0x2d/0x5f0
> > [ 151.104929] #2: 000000003341403b (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rcu_read_lock+0x0/0x80
> > [ 151.104934]
> > stack backtrace:
> > [ 151.104937] CPU: 2 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/2 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G E 4.17.0.g66d489e-tip-default #84
> > [ 151.104938] Hardware name: MEDION MS-7848/MS-7848, BIOS M7848W08.20C 09/23/2013
> > [ 151.104938] Call Trace:
> > [ 151.104942] dump_stack+0x78/0xb3
> > [ 151.104945] ttwu_stat+0x121/0x130
> > [ 151.104949] try_to_wake_up+0x2c2/0x5f0
> > [ 151.104953] ? cpu_stop_park+0x30/0x30
> > [ 151.104956] wake_up_q+0x4a/0x70
> > [ 151.104959] cpu_stop_queue_work+0x6b/0xa0
> > [ 151.104963] queue_stop_cpus_work+0x61/0xb0
> > [ 151.104968] stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu+0xd8/0x140
>
> > > diff --git a/kernel/stop_machine.c b/kernel/stop_machine.c
> > > index f89014a2c238..a32518c2ba4a 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/stop_machine.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/stop_machine.c
> > > @@ -650,8 +650,10 @@ int stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu(cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *data,
> > > /* Schedule work on other CPUs and execute directly for local CPU */
> > > set_state(&msdata, MULTI_STOP_PREPARE);
> > > cpu_stop_init_done(&done, num_active_cpus());
> > > - queue_stop_cpus_work(cpu_active_mask, multi_cpu_stop, &msdata,
> > > - &done);
> > > +
> > > + RCU_NONIDLE(queue_stop_cpus_work(cpu_active_mask, multi_cpu_stop,
> > > + &msdata, &done));
> > > +
> > > ret = multi_cpu_stop(&msdata);
>
> Paul, any clue on what else to try here? The whole MTRR setup is
> radically crazy but it's something we're stuck with (yay hardware) :/
>
> So the issue is that we're doing wakeups from an offline CPU (very early
> during bringup) and RCU (rightfully) complains about that. I thought
> RCU_NONIDLE() was the magic incantation that makes RCU 'watch', but
> clearly it's not enough here.
Huh.
No, RCU_NONIDLE() only works for idle, not for offline.
Maybe... Let me take a look. There must be some way to mark a
specific lock acquisition and release as being lockdep-invisible...
Another approach would be to have an architecture-specific thing that
caused RCU to be enabled way earlier on x86.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-03 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-17 14:21 Matt Fleming
2018-04-18 5:47 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-04-19 5:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-04-20 9:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 13:33 ` Matt Fleming
2018-05-03 12:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 12:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 12:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 13:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 13:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 14:16 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 14:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-03 16:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 17:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-03 17:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 18:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-04 3:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-15 4:30 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-17 14:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-17 14:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-17 14:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-17 14:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-22 17:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-03 14:39 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-05-03 14:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 9:24 ` [tip:sched/urgent] stop_machine, sched: Fix migrate_swap() vs. active_balance() deadlock tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180503143941.GH26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome