[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: WARNING: at lib/debugobjects.c:262 debug_print_object+0x8c/0xb0()
    On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:01:29 +0200
    Boaz Harrosh <> wrote:

    > On 01/24/2012 02:36 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
    > >
    > > No, I don't think the state would be undefined after
    > > cancel_delayed_work_sync. In principle you could requeue that work
    > > again if you like without needing to reinitialize it.
    > >
    > > I think this is a problem in the debugobjects code. It doesn't have
    > > any way to know that when the object is recycled out of the slab that
    > > the work is already initialized.
    > >
    > The only difference between your above example of requeue after
    > cancel_delayed_work_sync, and this here is the visit back to the
    > slab. Does the slab (Maybe in debug mode) stumps over some of the
    > record memory?
    > If the memory is constant what is then the difference between the two
    > cases?
    > > Certainly it's simple enough to reinitialize the work every time we
    > > allocate an inode here, but I don't think this is really a rpc_pipefs
    > > bug per-se.
    > That depends on the API intention. If an init is intended after
    > SLAB free then yes if not then not. We should ask for the intention
    > of this API.
    > > I can send a patch that works around this problem, but
    > > if there are plans to fix this in the debugobjects code, I won't
    > > bother...
    > >
    > You mean other fix then calling INIT_DELAYED_WORK? is that so
    > bad that we need more code to avoid it?

    I'm not opposed to a patch that sidesteps this problem, but I want to
    make sure we understand it so that we don't get bitten by it in other
    places. That's a good point. I hadn't considered whether memory
    poisoning is a factor. In the kernel I was testing:


    ...just to be sure:

    # cat /sys/kernel/slab/rpc_inode_cache/poison

    Looking at the code...

    It looks like SLAB will call the ctor on every object when it's
    allocated, even if it was recycled from an existing slab. SLUB doesn't
    do that however -- as best I can tell it avoids poisoning objects when
    there is a ctor function, so they don't get reinitialized like they
    would with SLAB.

    Probably the best solution here is to eliminate the ctor function and
    just initialize the objects whenever they're allocated. Since these
    objects aren't frequently recycled then there's little benefit to
    keeping that around, IMO. I'll spin up a patch for that soon.

    Still, I wonder if there are other problems like this around. The slab
    allocators seem to call debug_check_no_obj_freed() on kmem_cache_free,
    but parts of the objects themselves (like the timer in the work object
    here) get initialized in other places and aren't necessarily
    reinitialized when they're recycled out of the slab...

    Jeff Layton <>

     \ /
      Last update: 2012-01-24 17:35    [W:0.021 / U:1.988 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site