Hi Ted, Just triggered this on my test box:
[ 16.992068] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slab.h:421 [ 17.001136] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 0, name: swapper/30 [ 17.009116] CPU: 30 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/30 Not tainted 4.17.0-rc2+ #665 [ 17.017092] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge T630/0NT78X, BIOS 2.3.4 11/09/2016 [ 17.026354] Call Trace: [ 17.029573] <IRQ> [ 17.032318] dump_stack+0x46/0x5b [ 17.036509] ___might_sleep+0xd5/0x110 [ 17.041189] __kmalloc+0x166/0x1f0 [ 17.045486] crng_reseed+0x10c/0x2f0 [ 17.049965] ? add_interrupt_randomness+0x161/0x1e0 [ 17.055903] credit_entropy_bits+0x272/0x280 [ 17.061163] add_interrupt_randomness+0x161/0x1e0 [ 17.066905] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x2e/0x50 [ 17.072362] handle_irq_event+0x34/0x60 [ 17.077222] handle_edge_irq+0x71/0x180 [ 17.081996] handle_irq+0xa5/0x110 [ 17.086286] do_IRQ+0x41/0xc0 [ 17.090091] common_interrupt+0xf/0xf [ 17.094670] </IRQ> [ 17.097501] RIP: 0010:cpuidle_enter_state+0x9f/0x2d0 [ 17.103533] RSP: 0018:ffff880101747ed0 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffde [ 17.112900] RAX: ffff881fffbe0f80 RBX: 00000003f4cdab59 RCX: 000000000000001f [ 17.121364] RDX: 20c49ba5e353f7cf RSI: 000000003a3fcf2c RDI: 0000000000000000 [ 17.129829] RBP: 0000000000000002 R08: 0000000000000e7d R09: 0000004d7a7575c0 [ 17.138292] R10: ffff880101747eb8 R11: 000000000000002d R12: ffff883ffb1e2c00 [ 17.146760] R13: ffffffff820cc818 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 00000003d7b784fc [ 17.155227] do_idle+0x1b6/0x200 [ 17.159321] cpu_startup_entry+0x19/0x20 [ 17.164191] secondary_startup_64+0xa5/0xb0 [ 17.169382] random: crng init done during boot. We end up doing the numa_crng_init() from interrupt context, which makes things unhappy since you do GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL allocations from there. This was caused by: commit 8ef35c866f8862df074a49a93b0309725812dea8 Author: Theodore Ts'o <[email protected]> Date: Wed Apr 11 15:23:56 2018 -0400 random: set up the NUMA crng instances after the CRNG is fully initialized I was going to send the trivial GFP_KERNEL -> GFP_ATOMIC patch, but with the __GFP_NOFAIL, that's kind of tricky. We can't feasibly do init from when we add randomness, if you want it to be a NOFAIL kind of thing. -- Jens Axboe
