Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com>
To:     "Yan\, Zheng" <ukernel@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Yan\, Zheng" <zyan@redhat.com>, Sage Weil <sage@redhat.com>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>,
        ceph-devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ceph: Fix a memory leak in ci->i_head_snapc
References: <20190315111107.15154-1-lhenriques@suse.com>
        <CAAM7YAnD_dK2py+95N8Z7T+Vgr2ZbBJne+tNYivEeUGObhpiCQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <87r2b4zd2q.fsf@suse.com>
        <CAAM7YAkhA6ddto3KESWm8yw3D6f02ev7oYmEto=nK3mXZeUy4A@mail.gmail.com>
        <87lg1c17b2.fsf@suse.com>
        <CAAM7YAnhJUey6eX6zeWuPCVgyG9JghGQetJ-hk5R8nONivZzkg@mail.gmail.com>
        <87a7hr19v7.fsf@suse.com> <87o963jkcj.fsf@suse.com>
        <CAAM7YAko8qnfjWEdEqX=XE3azDZLpO_+egxDEsqowK9ByYZxwg@mail.gmail.com>
        <878swre7xz.fsf@suse.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:30:13 +0100
In-Reply-To: <878swre7xz.fsf@suse.com> (Luis Henriques's message of "Wed, 03
        Apr 2019 10:47:52 +0100")
Message-ID: <87d0lm6psq.fsf@suse.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com> writes:

> "Yan, Zheng" <ukernel@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:04 PM Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com> writes:
>>>
>>> > "Yan, Zheng" <ukernel@gmail.com> writes:
>>> >
>>> >> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:22 AM Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> "Yan, Zheng" <ukernel@gmail.com> writes:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 6:33 PM Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> "Yan, Zheng" <ukernel@gmail.com> writes:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 7:13 PM Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> I'm occasionally seeing a kmemleak warning in xfstest generic/013:
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> unreferenced object 0xffff8881fccca940 (size 32):
>>> >>> >> >>   comm "kworker/0:1", pid 12, jiffies 4295005883 (age 130.648s)
>>> >>> >> >>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>>> >>> >> >>     01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
>>> >>> >> >>     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
>>> >>> >> >>   backtrace:
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000d741a1ea>] build_snap_context+0x5b/0x2a0
>>> >>> >> >>     [<0000000021a00533>] rebuild_snap_realms+0x27/0x90
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000ac538600>] rebuild_snap_realms+0x42/0x90
>>> >>> >> >>     [<000000000e955fac>] ceph_update_snap_trace+0x2ee/0x610
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000a9550416>] ceph_handle_snap+0x317/0x5f3
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000fc287b83>] dispatch+0x362/0x176c
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000a312c741>] ceph_con_workfn+0x9ce/0x2cf0
>>> >>> >> >>     [<000000004168e3a9>] process_one_work+0x1d4/0x400
>>> >>> >> >>     [<000000002188e9e7>] worker_thread+0x2d/0x3c0
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000b593e4b3>] kthread+0x112/0x130
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000a8587dca>] ret_from_fork+0x35/0x40
>>> >>> >> >>     [<00000000ba1c9c1d>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> It looks like it is possible that we miss a flush_ack from the MDS when,
>>> >>> >> >> for example, umounting the filesystem.  In that case, we can simply drop
>>> >>> >> >> the reference to the ceph_snap_context obtained in ceph_queue_cap_snap().
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> Link: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/38224
>>> >>> >> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>>> >>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com>
>>> >>> >> >> ---
>>> >>> >> >>  fs/ceph/caps.c | 7 +++++++
>>> >>> >> >>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> diff --git a/fs/ceph/caps.c b/fs/ceph/caps.c
>>> >>> >> >> index 36a8dc699448..208f4dc6f574 100644
>>> >>> >> >> --- a/fs/ceph/caps.c
>>> >>> >> >> +++ b/fs/ceph/caps.c
>>> >>> >> >> @@ -1054,6 +1054,7 @@ int ceph_is_any_caps(struct inode *inode)
>>> >>> >> >>  static void drop_inode_snap_realm(struct ceph_inode_info *ci)
>>> >>> >> >>  {
>>> >>> >> >>         struct ceph_snap_realm *realm = ci->i_snap_realm;
>>> >>> >> >> +
>>> >>> >> >>         spin_lock(&realm->inodes_with_caps_lock);
>>> >>> >> >>         list_del_init(&ci->i_snap_realm_item);
>>> >>> >> >>         ci->i_snap_realm_counter++;
>>> >>> >> >> @@ -1063,6 +1064,12 @@ static void drop_inode_snap_realm(struct ceph_inode_info *ci)
>>> >>> >> >>         spin_unlock(&realm->inodes_with_caps_lock);
>>> >>> >> >>         ceph_put_snap_realm(ceph_sb_to_client(ci->vfs_inode.i_sb)->mdsc,
>>> >>> >> >>                             realm);
>>> >>> >> >> +       /*
>>> >>> >> >> +        * ci->i_head_snapc should be NULL, but we may still be waiting for a
>>> >>> >> >> +        * flush_ack from the MDS.  In that case, we still hold a ref for the
>>> >>> >> >> +        * ceph_snap_context and we need to drop it.
>>> >>> >> >> +        */
>>> >>> >> >> +       ceph_put_snap_context(ci->i_head_snapc);
>>> >>> >> >>  }
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>  /*
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > This does not seem right.  i_head_snapc is cleared when
>>> >>> >> > (ci->i_wrbuffer_ref_head == 0 && ci->i_dirty_caps == 0 &&
>>> >>> >> > ci->i_flushing_caps == 0) . Nothing do with dropping ci->i_snap_realm.
>>> >>> >> > Did you see 'reconnect denied' during the test? If you did, the fix
>>> >>> >> > should be in iterate_session_caps()
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> No, I didn't saw any 'reconnect denied' in the test.  The test actually
>>> >>> >> seems to execute fine, except from the memory leak.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> It's very difficult to reproduce this issue, but last time I managed to
>>> >>> >> get this memory leak to trigger I actually had some debugging code in
>>> >>> >> drop_inode_snap_realm, something like:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>   if (ci->i_head_snapc)
>>> >>> >>         printk("i_head_snapc: 0x%px\n", ci->i_head_snapc);
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > please add code that prints i_wrbuffer_ref_head, i_dirty_caps,
>>> >>> > i_flushing_caps. and try reproducing it again.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Ok, it took me a few hours, but I managed to reproduce the bug, with
>>> >>> those extra printks.  All those values are set to 0 when the bug
>>> >>> triggers (and i_head_snapc != NULL).
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks, which test triggers this bug?
>>> >
>>> > That's generic/013.  It usually triggers after a few hours of running it
>>> > in a loop (I'm using a vstart cluster for that).
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> I searched that code, found we may fail to cleanup i_head_snap in two
>>> >> places. One is in ceph_queue_cap_snap, Another is in
>>> >> remove_session_caps_cb().
>>> >
>>> > Ah, great!  I spent a lot of time looking but I couldn't really find it.
>>> > My bet was that ceph_queue_cap_snap was doing the ceph_get_snap_context
>>> > and that the corresponding ceph_put_snap_context would be done in
>>> > handle_cap_flush_ack. That's why I mentioned the missing flush_ack from
>>> > MDS.
>>>
>>> Something that I didn't said explicitly is that I *know* that the
>>> unbalanced ceph_get_snap_context() is the one in function
>>> ceph_queue_cap_snap().  I know this for sure because I've managed to
>>> reproduce the issue several times with an instrumented kernel (with
>>> tracepoints) that allowed me to keep track of all ceph_snap_context
>>> operations (create, get, put, delete).
>>>
>>
>> Sorry for the delay. please try
>
> Thank you, I'll try the test with your patch applied and see if I still
> see the issue (obviously, this will take some time as it takes several
> hours for the bug to trigger).

Ok, after several hours of running it, I confirm that I was not able to
reproduce the issue with your patch.  It took me a while because my test
environment changed a bit and I was failing to reproduce it even without
the patch.

Cheers,
-- 
Luis