From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: BUG: Bad page map in process udevd (anon_vma: (null)) in 2.6.38-rc4
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:27:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1298190440.8559.50.camel@edumazet-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik8kjt1TZ5vOoAm_y0f7toGtOSpxOsgCXO-bey9@mail.gmail.com>
Le samedi 19 fA(C)vrier 2011 A 22:15 -0800, Linus Torvalds a A(C)crit :
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Eric W. Biederman
> <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
> >
> > So I think the change below to fix dev_deactivate which Eric D. missed
> > will fix this problem. Now to go test that.
>
> You know what? I think the whole thing is crap. I did a simple grep
> for 'unregister_netdevice_many()', and they are all buggy.
>
> Look in net/ipv4/ip_gre.c, net/ipv4/ipip.c,net/ipv4/ipmr.c,
> net/ipv6/sit.c, look in net/ipv6/ip6mr.c, just just about anywhere.
> Those people *all* do basically a list-head on the stack, and then
> they do unregister_netdevice_many() on those things, and they clearly
> expect the list to be gone.
If they use rtnl_unlock() they are fine, since by the time rtnl_unlock()
returns, devices have been freed. LIST_HEAD content is void, or else we
have more serious bugs.
>
> I suspect that the right thing to do really is to change the semantics
> of those functions that take that kill-list *entirely*. Namely that
> they will literall ykill the list too, not just the entries on the
> list.
>
> So unregister_netdevice_many() should always return with the list
> empty and destroyed. There is no valid use of a list of netdevices
> after you've unregistered them.
>
> Now, dev_deactivate_many() actually has uses of that list after
> they've been de-activated (__dev_close_many will deactivate them, and
> then after that do the whole ndo_stop dance too, so I guess all (two)
> callers of that function need to get rid of their list manually. So I
> think your patch to sch_generic.c is good, but I really think the
> semantics of unregister_netdevice_many() should just be changed.
>
> And I think the networking people need to do some serious code review
> of this whole thing. The whole "let's build a list on the stack, then
> leave it around, and later use it randomly when the stack head pointer
> is long gone" thing is just incredible crapola. We shouldn't be
> finding these things one-by-one as a list debugging thing fires.
> People need tolook at their code and fix it before the bugs start
> triggering.
This code is run with RTNL locked anyway, so we could use a global list
head, like net_todo_list list (net/core/dev.c line 4980)
I believe the dev->unreg_list had a precise meaning when I introduced it
in 2009 (commits 44a0873d52282f24b1894c58c0f157e0f626ddc9,
9b5e383c11b08784eb0087617f880077982ef769,
23289a37e2b127dfc4de1313fba15bb4c9f0cd5b) .
devices were added to the LIST_HEAD, but never removed. (devices were
freed anyway, and list manipulated inside RNTL by a single thread)
But as Eric B. said, it was re-used for other roles.
We need to track these changes precisely and make appropriate fixes.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-20 8:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-16 18:52 Michal Hocko
2011-02-16 19:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-16 19:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-16 20:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-16 20:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-17 9:09 ` Michal Hocko
2011-02-17 16:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-17 16:26 ` Michal Hocko
2011-02-17 16:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-17 18:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-17 19:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-17 19:31 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-18 3:16 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-18 4:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-18 4:36 ` David Miller
2011-02-18 6:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-02-18 7:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-02-18 8:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] net: dont leave active on stack LIST_HEAD Eric Dumazet
2011-02-18 20:14 ` David Miller
2011-02-18 4:38 ` BUG: Bad page map in process udevd (anon_vma: (null)) in 2.6.38-rc4 Linus Torvalds
2011-02-18 4:40 ` David Miller
2011-02-18 4:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-18 8:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-18 5:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-18 8:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-02-18 8:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] net: deinit automatic LIST_HEAD Eric Dumazet
2011-02-18 20:14 ` David Miller
2011-02-18 12:29 ` BUG: Bad page map in process udevd (anon_vma: (null)) in 2.6.38-rc4 Michal Hocko
2011-02-18 16:26 ` Michal Hocko
2011-02-18 16:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-18 18:08 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-18 18:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-18 19:01 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2011-02-18 19:11 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2011-02-18 20:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-19 8:35 ` [PATCH] tcp: fix inet_twsk_deschedule() Eric Dumazet
2011-02-20 2:59 ` David Miller
2011-02-18 19:13 ` BUG: Bad page map in process udevd (anon_vma: (null)) in 2.6.38-rc4 Eric Dumazet
2011-02-18 19:56 ` David Miller
2011-02-19 6:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-19 15:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-20 2:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-20 6:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-20 8:27 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2011-02-20 19:53 ` David Miller
2011-02-20 21:34 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-18 8:54 ` Michal Hocko
2011-02-20 12:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-17 16:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-02-17 17:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-17 19:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-02-17 20:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-16 20:13 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1298190440.8559.50.camel@edumazet-laptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox