lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: INFO: task hung in perf_trace_event_unreg
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:32:03PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:04:35PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> >> <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 09:40:40AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 02 Apr 2018 02:20:02 -0700
> >> >> syzbot <syzbot+2dbc55da20fa246378fd@syzkaller.appspotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > syzbot hit the following crash on upstream commit
> >> >> > 0adb32858b0bddf4ada5f364a84ed60b196dbcda (Sun Apr 1 21:20:27 2018 +0000)
> >> >> > Linux 4.16
> >> >> > syzbot dashboard link:
> >> >> > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=2dbc55da20fa246378fd
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
> >> >> > Raw console output:
> >> >> > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?id=5487937873510400
> >> >> > Kernel config:
> >> >> > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?id=-2374466361298166459
> >> >> > compiler: gcc (GCC) 7.1.1 20170620
> >> >> >
> >> >> > IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> >> >> > Reported-by: syzbot+2dbc55da20fa246378fd@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> >> >> > It will help syzbot understand when the bug is fixed. See footer for
> >> >> > details.
> >> >> > If you forward the report, please keep this part and the footer.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > REISERFS warning (device loop4): super-6502 reiserfs_getopt: unknown mount
> >> >> > option "g �;e�K�׫>pquota"
> >> >
> >> > Might not hurt to look into the above, though perhaps this is just syzkaller
> >> > playing around with mount options.
> >> >
> >> >> > INFO: task syz-executor3:10803 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> >> >> > Not tainted 4.16.0+ #10
> >> >> > "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> >> >> > syz-executor3 D20944 10803 4492 0x80000002
> >> >> > Call Trace:
> >> >> > context_switch kernel/sched/core.c:2862 [inline]
> >> >> > __schedule+0x8fb/0x1ec0 kernel/sched/core.c:3440
> >> >> > schedule+0xf5/0x430 kernel/sched/core.c:3499
> >> >> > schedule_timeout+0x1a3/0x230 kernel/time/timer.c:1777
> >> >> > do_wait_for_common kernel/sched/completion.c:86 [inline]
> >> >> > __wait_for_common kernel/sched/completion.c:107 [inline]
> >> >> > wait_for_common kernel/sched/completion.c:118 [inline]
> >> >> > wait_for_completion+0x415/0x770 kernel/sched/completion.c:139
> >> >> > __wait_rcu_gp+0x221/0x340 kernel/rcu/update.c:414
> >> >> > synchronize_sched.part.64+0xac/0x100 kernel/rcu/tree.c:3212
> >> >> > synchronize_sched+0x76/0xf0 kernel/rcu/tree.c:3213
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't think this is a perf issue. Looks like something is preventing
> >> >> rcu_sched from completing. If there's a CPU that is running in kernel
> >> >> space and never scheduling, that can cause this issue. Or if RCU
> >> >> somehow missed a transition into idle or user space.
> >> >
> >> > The RCU CPU stall warning below strongly supports this position ...
> >>
> >> I think this is this guy then:
> >>
> >> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=17f23b094cd80df750e5b0f8982c521ee6bcbf40
> >>
> >> #syz dup: INFO: rcu detected stall in __process_echoes
> >
> > Seems likely to me!
> >
> >> Looking retrospectively at the various hang/stall bugs that we have, I
> >> think we need some kind of priority between them. I.e. we have rcu
> >> stalls, spinlock stalls, workqueue hangs, task hangs, silent machine
> >> hang and maybe something else. It would be useful if they fire
> >> deterministically according to priorities. If there is an rcu stall,
> >> that's always detected as CPU stall. Then if there is no RCU stall,
> >> but a workqueue stall, then that's always detected as workqueue stall,
> >> etc.
> >> Currently if we have an RCU stall (effectively CPU stall), that can be
> >> detected either RCU stall or a task hung, producing 2 different bug
> >> reports (which is bad).
> >> One can say that it's only a matter of tuning timeouts, but at least
> >> task hung detector has a problem that if you set timeout to X, it can
> >> detect hung anywhere between X and 2*X. And on one hand we need quite
> >> large timeout (a minute may not be enough), and on the other hand we
> >> can't wait for an hour just to make sure that the machine is indeed
> >> dead (these things happen every few minutes).
> >
> > I suppose that we could have a global variable that was set to the
> > priority of the complaint in question, which would suppress all
> > lower-priority complaints. Might need to be opt-in, though -- I would
> > guess that not everyone is going to be happy with one complaint suppressing
> > others, especially given the possibility that the two complaints might
> > be about different things.
> >
> > Or did you have something more deft in mind?
>
>
> syzkaller generally looks only at the first report. One does not know
> if/when there will be a second one, or the second one can be induced
> by the first one, and we generally want clean reports on a non-tainted
> kernel. So we don't just need to suppress lower priority ones, we need
> to produce the right report first.
> I am thinking maybe setting:
> - rcu stalls at 1.5 minutes
> - workqueue stalls at 2 minutes
> - task hungs at 2.5 minutes
> - and no output whatsoever at 3 minutes
> Do I miss anything? I think at least spinlocks. Should they go before
> or after rcu?

That is what I know of, but the Linux kernel being what it is, there is
probably something more out there. If not now, in a few months. The
RCU CPU stall timeout can be set on the kernel-boot command line, but
you probably already knew that.

Just for comparison, back in DYNIX/ptx days the RCU CPU stall timeout
was 1.5 -seconds-. ;-)

> This will require fixing task hung. Have not yet looked at workqueue detector.
> Does at least RCU respect the given timeout more or less precisely?

Assuming that there is at least one CPU capable of taking scheduling-clock
interrupts, it should respect the timeout to within a few jiffies.

Thanx, Paul

> >> >> > tracepoint_synchronize_unregister include/linux/tracepoint.h:80 [inline]
> >> >> > perf_trace_event_unreg.isra.2+0xb7/0x1f0
> >> >> > kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c:161
> >> >> > perf_trace_destroy+0xbc/0x100 kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c:236
> >> >> > tp_perf_event_destroy+0x15/0x20 kernel/events/core.c:7976
> >> >> > _free_event+0x3bd/0x10f0 kernel/events/core.c:4121
> >> >> > put_event+0x24/0x30 kernel/events/core.c:4204
> >> >> > perf_event_release_kernel+0x6e8/0xfc0 kernel/events/core.c:4310
> >> >> > perf_release+0x37/0x50 kernel/events/core.c:4320
> >> >> > __fput+0x327/0x7e0 fs/file_table.c:209
> >> >> > ____fput+0x15/0x20 fs/file_table.c:243
> >> >> > task_work_run+0x199/0x270 kernel/task_work.c:113
> >> >> > exit_task_work include/linux/task_work.h:22 [inline]
> >> >> > do_exit+0x9bb/0x1ad0 kernel/exit.c:865
> >> >> > do_group_exit+0x149/0x400 kernel/exit.c:968
> >> >> > get_signal+0x73a/0x16d0 kernel/signal.c:2469
> >> >> > do_signal+0x90/0x1e90 arch/x86/kernel/signal.c:809
> >> >> > exit_to_usermode_loop+0x258/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:162
> >> >> > prepare_exit_to_usermode arch/x86/entry/common.c:196 [inline]
> >> >> > syscall_return_slowpath arch/x86/entry/common.c:265 [inline]
> >> >> > do_syscall_64+0x6ec/0x940 arch/x86/entry/common.c:292
> >> >> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x42/0xb7
> >> >> > RIP: 0033:0x455269
> >> >> > RSP: 002b:00007f8976371ce8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000ca
> >> >> > RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 000000000072bec8 RCX: 0000000000455269
> >> >> > RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 000000000072bec8
> >> >> > RBP: 000000000072bec8 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 000000000072bea0
> >> >> > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> >> >> > R13: 00007ffe793f79cf R14: 00007f89763729c0 R15: 0000000000000000
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Showing all locks held in the system:
> >> >> > 2 locks held by khungtaskd/876:
> >> >> > #0: (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: [<000000008f2bec4b>]
> >> >> > check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks kernel/hung_task.c:175 [inline]
> >> >> > #0: (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: [<000000008f2bec4b>] watchdog+0x1c5/0xd60
> >> >> > kernel/hung_task.c:249
> >> >
> >> > ... And two places to start looking are the two above rcu_read_lock() calls.
> >> > Especially given that khungtask shows up below.
> >> >
> >> >> > #1: (tasklist_lock){.+.+}, at: [<0000000006b3009f>]
> >> >> > debug_show_all_locks+0xd3/0x3d0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4470
> >> >> > 2 locks held by getty/4414:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<00000000e51437c8>]
> >> >> > ldsem_down_read+0x37/0x40 drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c:365
> >> >> > #1: (&ldata->atomic_read_lock){+.+.}, at: [<00000000762a7320>]
> >> >> > n_tty_read+0x2ef/0x1a40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2131
> >> >> > 2 locks held by getty/4415:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<00000000e51437c8>]
> >> >> > ldsem_down_read+0x37/0x40 drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c:365
> >> >> > #1: (&ldata->atomic_read_lock){+.+.}, at: [<00000000762a7320>]
> >> >> > n_tty_read+0x2ef/0x1a40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2131
> >> >> > 2 locks held by getty/4416:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<00000000e51437c8>]
> >> >> > ldsem_down_read+0x37/0x40 drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c:365
> >> >> > #1: (&ldata->atomic_read_lock){+.+.}, at: [<00000000762a7320>]
> >> >> > n_tty_read+0x2ef/0x1a40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2131
> >> >> > 2 locks held by getty/4417:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<00000000e51437c8>]
> >> >> > ldsem_down_read+0x37/0x40 drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c:365
> >> >> > #1: (&ldata->atomic_read_lock){+.+.}, at: [<00000000762a7320>]
> >> >> > n_tty_read+0x2ef/0x1a40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2131
> >> >> > 2 locks held by getty/4418:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<00000000e51437c8>]
> >> >> > ldsem_down_read+0x37/0x40 drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c:365
> >> >> > #1: (&ldata->atomic_read_lock){+.+.}, at: [<00000000762a7320>]
> >> >> > n_tty_read+0x2ef/0x1a40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2131
> >> >> > 2 locks held by getty/4419:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<00000000e51437c8>]
> >> >> > ldsem_down_read+0x37/0x40 drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c:365
> >> >> > #1: (&ldata->atomic_read_lock){+.+.}, at: [<00000000762a7320>]
> >> >> > n_tty_read+0x2ef/0x1a40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2131
> >> >> > 2 locks held by getty/4420:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<00000000e51437c8>]
> >> >> > ldsem_down_read+0x37/0x40 drivers/tty/tty_ldsem.c:365
> >> >> > #1: (&ldata->atomic_read_lock){+.+.}, at: [<00000000762a7320>]
> >> >> > n_tty_read+0x2ef/0x1a40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2131
> >> >> > 1 lock held by syz-executor3/10803:
> >> >> > #0: (event_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<00000000c507b78a>]
> >> >> > perf_trace_destroy+0x28/0x100 kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c:234
> >> >> > 4 locks held by syz-executor5/10816:
> >> >> > #0: (&tty->legacy_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<00000000567b7b94>]
> >> >> > tty_lock+0x5d/0x90 drivers/tty/tty_mutex.c:19
> >> >> > #1: (&tty->legacy_mutex/1){+.+.}, at: [<00000000567b7b94>]
> >> >> > tty_lock+0x5d/0x90 drivers/tty/tty_mutex.c:19
> >> >> > #2: (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}, at: [<000000002b6b6a29>]
> >> >> > tty_ldisc_ref+0x1b/0x80 drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c:298
> >> >> > #3: (&o_tty->termios_rwsem/1){++++}, at: [<0000000007d9a7a4>]
> >> >> > n_tty_flush_buffer+0x21/0x320 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:357
> >> >> > 1 lock held by syz-executor2/10827:
> >> >> > #0: (event_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<00000000c507b78a>]
> >> >> > perf_trace_destroy+0x28/0x100 kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c:234
> >> >> > 1 lock held by blkid/10832:
> >> >> > #0: (&lo->lo_ctl_mutex/1){+.+.}, at: [<000000006e2f031e>]
> >> >> > lo_ioctl+0x8b/0x1b70 drivers/block/loop.c:1355
> >> >> > 1 lock held by syz-executor4/10835:
> >> >> > #0: (&lo->lo_ctl_mutex/1){+.+.}, at: [<000000006e2f031e>]
> >> >> > lo_ioctl+0x8b/0x1b70 drivers/block/loop.c:1355
> >> >> > 1 lock held by syz-executor4/10845:
> >> >> > #0: (&lo->lo_ctl_mutex/1){+.+.}, at: [<000000006e2f031e>]
> >> >> > lo_ioctl+0x8b/0x1b70 drivers/block/loop.c:1355
> >> >> >
> >> >> > =============================================
> >> >> >
> >> >> > NMI backtrace for cpu 1
> >> >> > CPU: 1 PID: 876 Comm: khungtaskd Not tainted 4.16.0+ #10
> >> >> > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> >> >> > Google 01/01/2011
> >> >> > Call Trace:
> >> >> > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:17 [inline]
> >> >> > dump_stack+0x194/0x24d lib/dump_stack.c:53
> >> >> > nmi_cpu_backtrace+0x1d2/0x210 lib/nmi_backtrace.c:103
> >> >> > nmi_trigger_cpumask_backtrace+0x123/0x180 lib/nmi_backtrace.c:62
> >> >> > arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace+0x14/0x20 arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c:38
> >> >> > trigger_all_cpu_backtrace include/linux/nmi.h:138 [inline]
> >> >> > check_hung_task kernel/hung_task.c:132 [inline]
> >> >> > check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks kernel/hung_task.c:190 [inline]
> >> >> > watchdog+0x90c/0xd60 kernel/hung_task.c:249
> >> >> > INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> >> >> > 0-....: (124996 ticks this GP) idle=75e/1/4611686018427387906
> >> >> > softirq=33205/33205 fqs=30980
> >> >> >
> >> >> > (t=125000 jiffies g=17618 c=17617 q=921)
> >> >> > kthread+0x33c/0x400 kernel/kthread.c:238
> >> >> > ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:406
> >> >> > Sending NMI from CPU 1 to CPUs 0:
> >> >> > NMI backtrace for cpu 0
> >> >> > CPU: 0 PID: 7457 Comm: kworker/u4:5 Not tainted 4.16.0+ #10
> >> >> > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> >> >> > Google 01/01/2011
> >> >> > Workqueue: events_unbound flush_to_ldisc
> >> >> > RIP: 0010:__process_echoes+0x641/0x770 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:733
> >> >> > RSP: 0018:ffff8801af4ff078 EFLAGS: 00000217
> >> >> > RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffc90003673000 RCX: ffffffff8352d4c2
> >> >> > RDX: 0000000000000006 RSI: 1ffff10039602994 RDI: ffffc9000367515e
> >> >> > RBP: ffff8801af4ff0e0 R08: 1ffff10035e9fdb5 R09: 0000000000000000
> >> >> > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000625628efd
> >> >> > R13: dffffc0000000000 R14: 0000000000000efe R15: 0000000000001b15
> >> >> > FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8801db000000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> >> >> > CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> >> >> > CR2: 00007ffd5bfa4ca8 CR3: 000000000846a005 CR4: 00000000001606f0
> >> >> > DR0: 0000000020000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> >> >> > DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000600
> >> >> > Call Trace:
> >> >> > commit_echoes+0x147/0x1b0 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:764
> >> >> > n_tty_receive_char_fast drivers/tty/n_tty.c:1416 [inline]
> >> >> > n_tty_receive_buf_fast drivers/tty/n_tty.c:1576 [inline]
> >> >> > __receive_buf drivers/tty/n_tty.c:1611 [inline]
> >> >> > n_tty_receive_buf_common+0x1156/0x2520 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:1709
> >> >> > n_tty_receive_buf2+0x33/0x40 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:1744
> >> >> > tty_ldisc_receive_buf+0xa7/0x180 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:456
> >> >> > tty_port_default_receive_buf+0x106/0x160 drivers/tty/tty_port.c:38
> >> >> > receive_buf drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:475 [inline]
> >> >> > flush_to_ldisc+0x3c4/0x590 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:524
> >> >> > process_one_work+0xc47/0x1bb0 kernel/workqueue.c:2113
> >> >> > worker_thread+0x223/0x1990 kernel/workqueue.c:2247
> >> >> > kthread+0x33c/0x400 kernel/kthread.c:238
> >> >> > ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:406
> >> >
> >> > And the above is another good place to look.
> >> >
> >> > Thanx, Paul
> >> >
> >> >> > Code: 60 12 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 fa 48 c1 e8 03 83 e2 07 42 0f b6 04 28 38
> >> >> > d0 7f 08 84 c0 0f 85 21 01 00 00 42 80 bc 33 60 12 00 00 82 <74> 0f e8 48
> >> >> > 90 1e fe 4d 8d 74 24 02 e9 58 ff ff ff e8 39 90 1e
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> > This bug is generated by a dumb bot. It may contain errors.
> >> >> > See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for details.
> >> >> > Direct all questions to syzkaller@googlegroups.com.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > syzbot will keep track of this bug report.
> >> >> > If you forgot to add the Reported-by tag, once the fix for this bug is
> >> >> > merged
> >> >> > into any tree, please reply to this email with:
> >> >> > #syz fix: exact-commit-title
> >> >> > To mark this as a duplicate of another syzbot report, please reply with:
> >> >> > #syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report
> >> >> > If it's a one-off invalid bug report, please reply with:
> >> >> > #syz invalid
> >> >> > Note: if the crash happens again, it will cause creation of a new bug
> >> >> > report.
> >> >> > Note: all commands must start from beginning of the line in the email body.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "syzkaller-bugs" group.
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syzkaller-bugs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> >> > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/syzkaller-bugs/20180402153332.GM3948%40linux.vnet.ibm.com.
> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >>
> >
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-02 18:39    [W:0.103 / U:0.800 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site