From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc: hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcontrol: fix a data race in scan count
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2020 20:28:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200209202840.2bf97ffcfa811550d733c461@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200206034945.2481-1-cai@lca.pw>
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 22:49:45 -0500 Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> wrote:
> struct mem_cgroup_per_node mz.lru_zone_size[zone_idx][lru] could be
> accessed concurrently as noticed by KCSAN,
>
> ...
>
> Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> CPU: 95 PID: 50964 Comm: cc1 Tainted: G W O L 5.5.0-next-20200204+ #6
> Hardware name: HPE ProLiant DL385 Gen10/ProLiant DL385 Gen10, BIOS A40 07/10/2019
>
> The write is under lru_lock, but the read is done as lockless. The scan
> count is used to determine how aggressively the anon and file LRU lists
> should be scanned. Load tearing could generate an inefficient heuristic,
> so fix it by adding READ_ONCE() for the read.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -533,7 +533,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_get_zone_lru_size(struct lruvec *lruvec,
> struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz;
>
> mz = container_of(lruvec, struct mem_cgroup_per_node, lruvec);
> - return mz->lru_zone_size[zone_idx][lru];
> + return READ_ONCE(mz->lru_zone_size[zone_idx][lru]);
> }
I worry about the readability/maintainability of these things. A naive
reader who comes upon this code will wonder "why the heck is it using
READ_ONCE?". A possibly lengthy trawl through the git history will
reveal the reason but that's rather unkind. Wouldn't a simple
/* modified under lru_lock, so use READ_ONCE */
improve the situation?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-10 4:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-06 3:49 Qian Cai
2020-02-10 4:28 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2020-02-10 4:44 ` Qian Cai
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=20200209202840.2bf97ffcfa811550d733c461@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.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