Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 5.8-rc*: kernel BUG at kernel/signal.c:1917 | From | Jiri Slaby <> | Date | Mon, 20 Jul 2020 07:44:54 +0200 |
| |
On 18. 07. 20, 19:44, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 07:14:07PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >> On 07/18, Jiri Slaby wrote: >>> >>> On 17. 07. 20, 14:40, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >>>> >>>> please see the updated patch below, lets check ptrace_unfreeze() too. >>> >>> Sure, dmesg attached. >> >> Thanks a lot! >> >> But I am totally confused... >> >>> [ 94.513944] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>> [ 94.513985] do not call blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING; state=8 set at [<000000002fe279e9>] ptrace_check_attach+0xbf/0x110 >> >> OK, so the ptracer has already did the TASK_TRACED -> __TASK_TRACED change in >> ptrace_freeze_traced(), >> >>> [ 94.514019] WARNING: CPU: 16 PID: 34171 at kernel/sched/core.c:6881 __might_sleep+0x6c/0x70 >>> [ 94.514020] Modules linked in: ata_generic(E) pata_acpi(E) crc32_pclmul(E) qemu_fw_cfg(E) ata_piix(E) e1000(E) nls_iso8859_1(E) nls_cp437(E) vfat(E) fat(E) virtio_blk(E) virtio_mmio(E) xfs(E) btrfs(E) blake2b_generic(E) xor(E) raid6_pq(E) libcrc32c(E) crc32c_intel(E) reiserfs(E) squashfs(E) fuse(E) dm_snapshot(E) dm_bufio(E) dm_crypt(E) dm_mod(E) binfmt_misc(E) loop(E) sg(E) virtio_rng(E) >>> [ 94.514082] CPU: 16 PID: 34171 Comm: strace Tainted: G E 5.8.0-rc5-100.g55927f9-default #1 openSUSE Tumbleweed (unreleased) >>> [ 94.514084] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.12.0-0-ga698c89-rebuilt.suse.com 04/01/2014 >>> [ 94.514087] RIP: 0010:__might_sleep+0x6c/0x70 >>> [ 94.514090] Code: 41 5c 41 5d e9 25 ff ff ff 48 8b 90 68 1a 00 00 48 8b 70 10 48 c7 c7 10 45 70 8f c6 05 4f a9 68 01 01 48 89 d1 e8 7a bb fc ff <0f> 0b eb c8 0f 1f 44 00 00 55 48 89 e5 41 57 41 56 41 55 49 89 fd >>> [ 94.514092] RSP: 0018:ffff9ffa4ba1be00 EFLAGS: 00010286 >>> [ 94.514093] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff8dc82b503e00 RCX: 0000000000000489 >>> [ 94.514094] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000096 RDI: 0000000000000247 >>> [ 94.514095] RBP: ffffffff8f6ffa6b R08: 0000000000000004 R09: 0000000000000489 >>> [ 94.514095] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000039 >>> [ 94.514096] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: ffff8dc82b5045e4 >>> [ 94.514098] FS: 00007fa00f1f9240(0000) GS:ffff8dcb0c000000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 >>> [ 94.514099] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >>> [ 94.514100] CR2: 0000557b53d25877 CR3: 00000004ca490005 CR4: 0000000000360ee0 >>> [ 94.514103] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 >>> [ 94.514104] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 >>> [ 94.514105] Call Trace: >>> [ 94.514821] ptrace_stop+0x1a9/0x300 >> >> This is already wrong. But >> >> Where does this __might_sleep() come from ??? I ses no blocking calls >> in ptrace_stop(). Not to mention it is called with ->siglock held and >> right after this lock is dropped we take tasklist_lock. >> >> How this connects to the debugging patch I sent? Did you see this warning >> without that patch? >> >> >>> [ 94.514888] WARNING: CPU: 16 PID: 34171 at kernel/signal.c:2219 ptrace_stop+0x1d8/0x300 >> ... >>> [ 94.514899] RIP: 0010:ptrace_stop+0x1d8/0x300 >> >> This is WARN_ON(current->state) added to ptrace_stop(), this can explain >> BUG_ON() in do_notify_parent() you reported. >> >> So, the tracee returns from schedule() with ->state != TASK_RUNNING ??? >> This must not be possible. >> >> OK, perhaps task->state was changed by ptrace_unfreeze_traced()? this can >> only happen if it races with ttwu(__TASK_TRACED) without ->siglock held, >> nobody should do this. >> >> Strange. > > I have tried to reproduce this with an vanilla upstream 5.8-rc4 and the > strace test-suite with > > make check -j4 > > and I wasn't able to after multiple retries. Jiri, just to make sure > this is upstream 5.8-rc4 without any additional patches?
You tackled it, we cherry-picked dbfb089d360 to our kernels. Ccing more people.
So if you try with pure vanilla 5.8-rc6 (it contains the commit), you should be able to reproduce. I am.
OTOH 5.8-rc6 with that commit reverted -- I cannot reproduce there. So it must be it.
> Anything special required to reproduce this in the way you run strace > and so on?
Nothing special there. Except the HW: when I run a VM with 16+ processors, it's much more likely to be hit (usually, on the first run of make check).
thanks, -- js
| |