lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [origin tree SLAB corruption] BUG kmalloc-64: Poison overwritten, INFO: Allocated in bdi_alloc_work+0x2b/0x100 age=175 cpu=1 pid=3514
On Tue, Sep 15 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 14 2009, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 07:40:27AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > BUG kmalloc-64: Poison overwritten
> > > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > INFO: 0xf498f6a0-0xf498f6a7. First byte 0x90 instead of 0x6b
> > > > > INFO: Allocated in bdi_alloc_work+0x2b/0x100 age=175 cpu=1 pid=3514
> > > > > INFO: Freed in bdi_work_free+0x45/0x60 age=9 cpu=1 pid=3509
> > > > > INFO: Slab 0xc3257d84 objects=36 used=11 fp=0xf498f690 flags=0x400000c3
> > > > > INFO: Object 0xf498f690 @offset=1680 fp=0xf498fe00
> > > > >
> > > > > Bytes b4 0xf498f680: ab 0d 00 00 9c 27 ff ff 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a ?....'??ZZZZZZZZ
> > > > > Object 0xf498f690: 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
> > > > > Object 0xf498f6a0: 90 f3 98 f4 60 3c 11 c1 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b 6b .?.?`<.?kkkkkkkk
> > > >
> > > > That's 8 bytes of 0xf498f398 and 0xc1113c60. Doesn't look like much, but
> > > > they're both valid kernel pointers, and the 0xf498f398 one is actually
> > > > into the same page as the corruption, so it's a pointer to the same slab
> > > > type (or at least same size). Which is a good hint in itself: we're
> > > > looking at a list or something.
> > > >
> > > > And it's at offset 16 in the structure.
> > > >
> > > > That's almost certainly a "struct bdi_work", and the use-aftr-free thing
> > > > is the "struct rcu_head rcu_head" part of it. That first thing (pointer to
> > > > the same page) is 'next', and the second thing is a pointer to kernel text
> > > > (and I can pretty much guarantee that 0xc1113c60 is 'bdi_work_free').
> > > >
> > > > So this is either a fs/fs-writeback.c bug, or it's a problem with RCU.
> > > > Both of them are new or hugely changed since 2.6.31.
> > >
> > > If this run had used CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU rather than the
> > > CONFIG_TREE_RCU that it actually had used, I would suggest applying
> > > the patchset I submitted yesterday (Sept 13).
> > >
> > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/888803
> >
> > Ingo, did it? [...]
>
> The config i attached to the bugreport has:
>
> #
> # RCU Subsystem
> #
> CONFIG_TREE_RCU=y
> # CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU is not set
> CONFIG_RCU_TRACE=y
> CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT=64
> CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT=y
> CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE=y
>
> So TREE_PREEMPT_RCU & the synchronize_rcu() bug Paul fixed is out.

Yeah, I noticed later on. synchronize_rcu() is only used on exit as
well, so if it happened during boot it would have to be a call_rcu()
problem.

> > [...] I'll dive into this tonight, Linus' analysis and just a general
> > feel does point in the direction of the bdi work.
>
> Hard to tell whether it's BDI, RCU or something else - sadly this is the
> only incident i've managed to log so far. (We'd be all much happier if
> boxes crashed left and right! ;)

Indeed, that's much easier to test and fix!

> -tip's been carrying the RCU changes for a long(er) time which would
> reduce the chance of this being RCU related. [ It's still possible
> though: if it's a bug with a probability of hitting this box on these
> workloads with a chance of 1:20,000 or worse. ]
>
> Plus it triggered shortly after i updated -tip to latest -git which had
> the BDI bits - which would indicate the BDI stuff - or just about
> anything else in -git for that matter - or something older in -tip.
> Every day without having hit this crash once more broadens the range of
> plausible possibilities.

I haven't found anything here yet, but I'll keep playing. My RCU config
is the same as yours.

> In any case, i'll refrain from trying to fit a line on a single point of
> measurement ;-)

;-)

--
Jens Axboe



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-15 09:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans