forked fromtorvalds/linux
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork1
Commit2e517d6
lockdep: fix fs_reclaim warning
Dave Jones reported fs_reclaim lockdep warnings. ============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 4.15.0-rc9-backup-debug+ #1 Not tainted -------------------------------------------- sshd/24800 is trying to acquire lock: (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: [<0000000084f438c2>] fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x5/0x30 but task is already holding lock: (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: [<0000000084f438c2>] fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x5/0x30 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(fs_reclaim); lock(fs_reclaim); *** DEADLOCK *** May be due to missing lock nesting notation 2 locks held by sshd/24800: #0: (sk_lock-AF_INET6){+.+.}, at: [<000000001a069652>] tcp_sendmsg+0x19/0x40 #1: (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: [<0000000084f438c2>] fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x5/0x30 stack backtrace: CPU: 3 PID: 24800 Comm: sshd Not tainted 4.15.0-rc9-backup-debug+ #1 Call Trace: dump_stack+0xbc/0x13f __lock_acquire+0xa09/0x2040 lock_acquire+0x12e/0x350 fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x29/0x30 kmem_cache_alloc+0x3d/0x2c0 alloc_extent_state+0xa7/0x410 __clear_extent_bit+0x3ea/0x570 try_release_extent_mapping+0x21a/0x260 __btrfs_releasepage+0xb0/0x1c0 btrfs_releasepage+0x161/0x170 try_to_release_page+0x162/0x1c0 shrink_page_list+0x1d5a/0x2fb0 shrink_inactive_list+0x451/0x940 shrink_node_memcg.constprop.88+0x4c9/0x5e0 shrink_node+0x12d/0x260 try_to_free_pages+0x418/0xaf0 __alloc_pages_slowpath+0x976/0x1790 __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x52c/0x5c0 new_slab+0x374/0x3f0 ___slab_alloc.constprop.81+0x47e/0x5a0 __slab_alloc.constprop.80+0x32/0x60 __kmalloc_track_caller+0x267/0x310 __kmalloc_reserve.isra.40+0x29/0x80 __alloc_skb+0xee/0x390 sk_stream_alloc_skb+0xb8/0x340 tcp_sendmsg_locked+0x8e6/0x1d30 tcp_sendmsg+0x27/0x40 inet_sendmsg+0xd0/0x310 sock_write_iter+0x17a/0x240 __vfs_write+0x2ab/0x380 vfs_write+0xfb/0x260 SyS_write+0xb6/0x140 do_syscall_64+0x1e5/0xc05 entry_SYSCALL64_slow_path+0x25/0x25This warning is caused by commitd92a8cf ("locking/lockdep:Rework FS_RECLAIM annotation") which replaced the use oflockdep_{set,clear}_current_reclaim_state() in __perform_reclaim()and lockdep_trace_alloc() in slab_pre_alloc_hook() withfs_reclaim_acquire()/ fs_reclaim_release().Since __kmalloc_reserve() from __alloc_skb() adds __GFP_NOMEMALLOC |__GFP_NOWARN to gfp_mask, and all reclaim path simply propagates__GFP_NOMEMALLOC, fs_reclaim_acquire() in slab_pre_alloc_hook() istrying to grab the 'fake' lock again when __perform_reclaim() alreadygrabbed the 'fake' lock.The /* this guy won't enter reclaim */ if ((current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)) return false;test which causes slab_pre_alloc_hook() to try to grab the 'fake' lockwas added by commitcf40bd1 ("lockdep: annotate reclaim context(__GFP_NOFS)"). But that test is outdated because PF_MEMALLOC threadwon't enter reclaim regardless of __GFP_NOMEMALLOC after commit341ce06 ("page allocator: calculate the alloc_flags for allocationonly once") added the PF_MEMALLOC safeguard ( /* Avoid recursion of direct reclaim */ if (p->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) goto nopage;in __alloc_pages_slowpath()).Thus, let's fix outdated test by removing __GFP_NOMEMALLOC test andallow __need_fs_reclaim() to return false.Link:http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201802280650.FJC73911.FOSOMLJVFFQtHO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jpFixes:d92a8cf ("locking/lockdep: Rework FS_RECLAIM annotation")Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>Reported-by: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>Tested-by: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>Cc: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>[4.14+]Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>1 parent296cefe commit2e517d6
1 file changed
+1
-1
lines changed| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
3596 | 3596 | | |
3597 | 3597 | | |
3598 | 3598 | | |
3599 | | - | |
| 3599 | + | |
3600 | 3600 | | |
3601 | 3601 | | |
3602 | 3602 | | |
| |||
0 commit comments
Comments
(0)