On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 05:20:31PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > [CC Rafael] > > I've got lost in the acpi indirection (again). I can see > acpi_device_hotplug calling lock_device_hotplug() but i cannot find a > path down to add_memory() which might call add_memory_resource. But the > patch below sounds suspicious to me. Is it possible that this could lead > to a deadlock. I would suspect that it is the s390 code which needs to > do the locking. But I would have to double check - it is really easy to > get lost there.
To me it rather looks like bfc8c90139eb ("mem-hotplug: implement get/put_online_mems") introduced quite subtle and probably wrong locking rules. The patch introduced mem_hotplug_begin() in order to have something like cpu_hotplug_begin() for memory. Note that for cpu hotplug all cpu_hotplug_begin() calls are serialized by cpu_maps_update_begin(). Especially this makes sure that active_writer can only be changed by one process. (See also Dan's commit which introduced the lock_device_hotplug() calls: https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=148693912419972&w=2 ) If you look at the above commit bfc8c90139eb: there is nothing like cpu_maps_update_begin() for memory. And therefore it's possible to have concurrent writers to active_writer. It looks like now lock_device_hotplug() is supposed to be the new cpu_maps_update_begin() for memory. But.. this looks like a mess, unless I read the code completely wrong ;) > On Sun 26-02-17 12:42:44, Sebastian Ott wrote: > > With 4.10.0-10265-gc4f3f22 the following warning is triggered on s390: > > > > WARNING: CPU: 6 PID: 1 at drivers/base/core.c:643 > > assert_held_device_hotplug+0x4a/0x58 > > [ 5.731214] Call Trace: > > [ 5.731219] ([<000000000067b8b0>] assert_held_device_hotplug+0x40/0x58) > > [ 5.731225] [<0000000000337914>] mem_hotplug_begin+0x34/0xc8 > > [ 5.731231] [<00000000008b897e>] add_memory_resource+0x7e/0x1f8 > > [ 5.731236] [<00000000008b8bd2>] add_memory+0xda/0x130 > > [ 5.731243] [<0000000000d7f0dc>] add_memory_merged+0x15c/0x178 > > [ 5.731247] [<0000000000d7f3a6>] sclp_detect_standby_memory+0x2ae/0x2f8 > > [ 5.731252] [<00000000001002ba>] do_one_initcall+0xa2/0x150 > > [ 5.731258] [<0000000000d3adc0>] kernel_init_freeable+0x228/0x2d8 > > [ 5.731263] [<00000000008b6572>] kernel_init+0x2a/0x140 > > [ 5.731267] [<00000000008c3972>] kernel_thread_starter+0x6/0xc > > [ 5.731272] [<00000000008c396c>] kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc > > [ 5.731276] no locks held by swapper/0/1. > > [ 5.731280] Last Breaking-Event-Address: > > [ 5.731285] [<000000000067b8b6>] assert_held_device_hotplug+0x46/0x58 > > [ 5.731292] ---[ end trace 46480df21194c96a ]--- > > such an informtion belongs to the changelog > > > ----->8 > > mm, add_memory_resource: hold device_hotplug lock over mem_hotplug_{begin, > > done} > > > > With commit 3fc219241 ("mm: validate device_hotplug is held for memory > > hotplug") > > a lock assertion was added to mem_hotplug_begin() which led to a warning > > when add_memory() is called. Fix this by acquiring device_hotplug_lock in > > add_memory_resource(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Ott <seb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > --- > > mm/memory_hotplug.c | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > index 1d3ed58..c633bbc 100644 > > --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > @@ -1361,6 +1361,7 @@ int __ref add_memory_resource(int nid, struct > > resource *res, bool online) > > new_pgdat = !p; > > } > > > > + lock_device_hotplug(); > > mem_hotplug_begin(); > > > > /* > > @@ -1416,6 +1417,7 @@ int __ref add_memory_resource(int nid, struct > > resource *res, bool online) > > > > out: > > mem_hotplug_done(); > > + unlock_device_hotplug(); > > return ret; > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(add_memory_resource); > > -- > > 2.3.0 > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in > > the body to majord...@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, > > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . > > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"d...@kvack.org"> em...@kvack.org </a> > > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs >