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;
Date:   Thu, 7 Nov 2019 13:21:25 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: memcg: switch to css_tryget() in
 get_mem_cgroup_from_mm()
Message-ID: <20191107122125.GS8314@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20191106225131.3543616-1-guro@fb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191106225131.3543616-1-guro@fb.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed 06-11-19 14:51:30, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> We've encountered a rcu stall in get_mem_cgroup_from_mm():
> 
>  rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
>  rcu: 33-....: (21000 ticks this GP) idle=6c6/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=35441/35441 fqs=5017
>  (t=21031 jiffies g=324821 q=95837) NMI backtrace for cpu 33
>  <...>
>  RIP: 0010:get_mem_cgroup_from_mm+0x2f/0x90
>  <...>
>  __memcg_kmem_charge+0x55/0x140
>  __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x267/0x320
>  pipe_write+0x1ad/0x400
>  new_sync_write+0x127/0x1c0
>  __kernel_write+0x4f/0xf0
>  dump_emit+0x91/0xc0
>  writenote+0xa0/0xc0
>  elf_core_dump+0x11af/0x1430
>  do_coredump+0xc65/0xee0
>  ? unix_stream_sendmsg+0x37d/0x3b0
>  get_signal+0x132/0x7c0
>  do_signal+0x36/0x640
>  ? recalc_sigpending+0x17/0x50
>  exit_to_usermode_loop+0x61/0xd0
>  do_syscall_64+0xd4/0x100
>  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> 
> The problem is caused by an exiting task which is associated with
> an offline memcg.

Hmm, how can we have a task in an offline memcg? I thought that any
existing task will prevent cgroup removal from proceeding. Is this some
sort of race where the task managed to disassociate from the cgroup
while there is still a binding to a memcg existing? What am I missing?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs