Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200727134914.312934924@linuxfoundation.org> <CA+G9fYvBRONMYwX36Hcju4JA5TwstkT2Afyuy2DB1zQcBcc1CA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+G9fYvBRONMYwX36Hcju4JA5TwstkT2Afyuy2DB1zQcBcc1CA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Jul 2020 21:03:11 +0800
Message-ID: <CAMZfGtVV-u7K+Z0vFLkoKv1UOTfk=a9+r_6G4PYfGLywwnkm3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/86] 4.19.135-rc1 review
To:     Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, patches@kernelci.org,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>,
        linux- stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, mm-commits@vger.kernel.org,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org,
        clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Thanks for your test. I have reviewed the patch:

[PATCH 4.19 76/86] mm: memcg/slab: fix memory leak at non-root
kmem_cache destroy

There is a backport problem and I have pointed out the problem in that emai=
l.

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Naresh Kamboju
<naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 at 19:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.135 release.
> > There are 86 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> >
> > Responses should be made by Wed, 29 Jul 2020 13:48:51 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> >
> > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> >         https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patc=
h-4.19.135-rc1.gz
> > or in the git tree and branch at:
> >         git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stab=
le-rc.git linux-4.19.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> >
> > -------------
> > Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:
> <trim>
>
> Results from Linaro=E2=80=99s test farm.
> Regressions detected on x86_64.
>
> Boot failures on x86_64 devices running 4.19.135-rc1 kernel.
>
> Summary
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> kernel: 4.19.135-rc1
> git repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-st=
able-rc.git
> git branch: linux-4.19.y
> git commit: e11702667f84474535b156dbb194deffa0a6cdb4
> git describe: v4.19.134-87-ge11702667f84
> Test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-4.19-oe/=
build/v4.19.134-87-ge11702667f84
>
> > Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
> >     mm: memcg/slab: fix memory leak at non-root kmem_cache destroy
>
> [    2.510884] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> [    2.510884] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
> [    2.510884] 4.19.135-rc1 #1 Not tainted
> [    2.510884] --------------------------------------------
> [    2.510884] swapper/0/1 is trying to acquire lock:
> [    2.510884] 0000000088703397 (slab_mutex){+.+.}, at:
> kmem_cache_destroy+0x9a/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]
> [    2.510884] but task is already holding lock:
> [    2.510884] 0000000088703397 (slab_mutex){+.+.}, at:
> kmem_cache_destroy+0x45/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]
> [    2.510884] other info that might help us debug this:
> [    2.510884]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [    2.510884]
> [    2.510884]        CPU0
> [    2.510884]        ----
> [    2.510884]   lock(slab_mutex);
> [    2.510884]   lock(slab_mutex);
> [    2.510884]
> [    2.510884]  *** DEADLOCK ***
> [    2.510884]
> [    2.510884]  May be due to missing lock nesting notation
> [    2.510884]
> [    2.510884] 3 locks held by swapper/0/1:
> [    2.510884]  #0: 000000008702dddc (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++},
> at: kmem_cache_destroy+0x32/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]  #1: 0000000050103e4d (mem_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++},
> at: kmem_cache_destroy+0x37/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]  #2: 0000000088703397 (slab_mutex){+.+.}, at:
> kmem_cache_destroy+0x45/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]
> [    2.510884] stack backtrace:
> [    2.510884] CPU: 2 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.19.135-rc1 #1
> [    2.510884] Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-5019S-ML/X11SSH-F, BIOS
> 2.0b 07/27/2017
> [    2.510884] Call Trace:
> [    2.510884]  dump_stack+0x7a/0xa5
> [    2.510884]  __lock_acquire+0x6f1/0x1380
> [    2.510884]  ? ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50
> [    2.510884]  lock_acquire+0x95/0x190
> [    2.510884]  ? lock_acquire+0x95/0x190
> [    2.510884]  ? kmem_cache_destroy+0x9a/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]  ? kmem_cache_destroy+0x9a/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]  __mutex_lock+0x83/0x990
> [    2.510884]  ? kmem_cache_destroy+0x9a/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]  ? kmem_cache_destroy+0x60/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]  ? set_debug_rodata+0x17/0x17
> [    2.510884]  ? set_debug_rodata+0x17/0x17
> [    2.510884]  mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
> [    2.510884]  ? get_online_mems+0x5f/0x90
> [    2.510884]  ? mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
> [    2.510884]  kmem_cache_destroy+0x9a/0x2b0
> [    2.510884]  ? set_debug_rodata+0x17/0x17
> [    2.510884]  intel_iommu_init+0x11c6/0x1326
> [    2.510884]  ? kfree+0xc4/0x240
> [    2.510884]  ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0xef/0x180
> [    2.510884]  ? kfree+0xc4/0x240
> [    2.510884]  ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x4c/0x100
> [    2.510884]  ? unpack_to_rootfs+0x272/0x29a
> [    2.510884]  ? e820__memblock_setup+0x64/0x64
> [    2.510884]  ? set_debug_rodata+0x17/0x17
> [    2.510884]  pci_iommu_init+0x1a/0x44
> [    2.510884]  ? e820__memblock_setup+0x64/0x64
> [    2.510884]  ? pci_iommu_init+0x1a/0x44
> [    2.510884]  do_one_initcall+0x61/0x2b4
> [    2.510884]  ? set_debug_rodata+0xa/0x17
> [    2.510884]  ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x81/0x90
> [    2.510884]  kernel_init_freeable+0x1d8/0x270
> [    2.510884]  ? rest_init+0x190/0x190
> [    2.510884]  kernel_init+0xe/0x110
> [    2.510884]  ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50
>
>
> Full test log:
> https://pastebin.com/PWkk0YaF
>
> --
> Linaro LKFT
> https://lkft.linaro.org


--
Yours,
Muchun