Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934250Ab3HHNHw (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 09:07:52 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:21629 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934211Ab3HHNHv (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 09:07:51 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=P6i4d18u c=1 sm=0 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:17 a=Drc5e87SC40A:10 a=48llYAvPBHsA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=r-PqRJr4KhwA:10 a=8up54zFxcE44aTHxrR4A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 67.255.60.225 Message-ID: <1375967269.6848.46.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [BUG] hackbench locks up with perf in 3.11-rc1 and beyond From: Steven Rostedt To: Joonsoo Kim Cc: LKML , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Christoph Lameeter , Wanpeng Li , Pekka Enberg Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:07:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130808050441.GA3214@lge.com> References: <1375934936.6848.41.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130808050441.GA3214@lge.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1477 Lines: 45 On Thu, 2013-08-08 at 14:04 +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > Sorry about it. > Now, I think that this is a buggy commit, so should be reverted. > > For confirm that, could I ask a question about your configuration, Steven? > I guess, you may set 0 to all kmem caches's cpu_partial via sysfs, doesn't it? Ah, you're right. As this box is also used to test the -rt patch, there's a script installed to disable all cpu_partials. This is because cpu_partials are known to cause non-deterministic behavior in -rt. I forgot about that script, as this box is used for regular mainline testing as well. > > In this case, memory leak is possible in following case. > Code flow of possible leak is follwing case. > > * in __slab_free() > 1. (!new.inuse || !prior) && !was_frozen > 2. !kmem_cache_debug && !prior > 3. new.frozen = 1 > 4. after cmpxchg_double_slab, run the (!n) case with new.frozen=1 > 5. with this patch, put_cpu_partial() doesn't do anything, > because this cache's cpu_partial is 0 > 6. return > > In step 5, leak occur. > > I have a solution to prevent this problem, but in this stage, IMHO, > reverting it may be better. Yeah, I would suggest that too. As this seems to be a serious regression. Thanks! -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/