From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Hiroyuki Kamezawa <kamezawa.hiroyuki@gmail.com>,
Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [BUGFIX] update mm->owner even if no next owner.
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:04:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110611180415.GB31154@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110611163943.GA3238@redhat.com>
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 06:39:43PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 09:04:14AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > I had another go at reproducing it, 2 hours that time, then a try with
> > 692e0b35427a reverted: it ran overnight for 9 hours when I stopped it.
> >
> > Andrea, please would you ask Linus to revert that commit before -rc3?
> > Or is there something else you'd like us to try instead? I admit that
> > I've not actually taken the time to think through exactly how it goes
> > wrong, but it does look dangerous.
>
> Here I was asked if the mem_cgroup_newpage_charge need the mmap_sem at
> all. And if not why not to release the mmap_sem early.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/14/276
>
> So I didn't see why mmap_sem was needed, I also asked confirmation and
> who answered agreed it was safe without mmap_sem even if it's the only
> place doing that. Maybe that assumption was wrong and we need
> mmap_sem after all if this commit is causing problems.
>
> Or did you find something wrong in the actual patch?
>
> Do I understand right that the bug just that we must run
> alloc_hugepage_vma+mem_cgroup_newpage_charge within the same critical
> section protected by the mmap_sem read mode? Do we know why?
The problem is that mm->owner points to a stale task structure if the
last possible owner is exiting. The mmap_sem just prevented the task
from actually exiting through write-acquiring the mmap_sem in
khugepaged_exit().
I think enforcing lifetime of an object through locks is not the
nicest thing to do, so I stand by what I wrote in the mail you linked
to above :) and agree with Kame that mm->owner should just not point
to a stale task struct. The memcg code can handle it going NULL.
--
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:[~2011-06-11 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20110609212956.GA2319@redhat.com>
2011-06-09 22:47 ` 3.0rc2 oops in mem_cgroup_from_task Ying Han
2011-06-09 23:42 ` Ying Han
2011-06-10 0:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-06-10 1:30 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-06-10 2:33 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-06-10 3:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-06-10 3:55 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-06-10 4:30 ` [PATCH] [BUGFIX] update mm->owner even if no next owner KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-06-10 5:06 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2011-06-10 5:21 ` Xiaotian Feng
2011-06-10 5:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-06-10 21:49 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-06-10 23:54 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-06-11 17:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-06-11 18:44 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-06-11 23:04 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2011-06-13 1:41 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-06-13 1:54 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-06-13 14:03 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-06-11 0:46 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2011-06-11 16:04 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-06-11 16:39 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-06-11 18:04 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2011-06-11 8:19 ` 3.0rc2 oops in mem_cgroup_from_task Michal Hocko
2011-06-11 15:46 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-06-12 9:09 ` Michal Hocko
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=20110611180415.GB31154@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyuki@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=yinghan@google.com \
/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