From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: mike.kravetz@oracle.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jianchao Guo <guojianchao@bytedance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: add mempolicy check in the reservation routine
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 09:39:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200724073942.GE4061@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200723074417.89467-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
On Thu 23-07-20 15:44:17, Muchun Song wrote:
> In the reservation routine, we only check whether the cpuset meets
> the memory allocation requirements. But we ignore the mempolicy of
> MPOL_BIND case. If someone mmap hugetlb succeeds, but the subsequent
> memory allocation may fail due to mempolicy restrictions and receives
> the SIGBUS signal. This can be reproduced by the follow steps.
>
> 1) Compile the test case.
> cd tools/testing/selftests/vm/
> gcc map_hugetlb.c -o map_hugetlb
>
> 2) Pre-allocate huge pages. Suppose there are 2 numa nodes in the
> system. Each node will pre-allocate one huge page.
> echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages
>
> 3) Run test case(mmap 4MB). We receive the SIGBUS signal.
> numactl --membind=0 ./map_hugetlb 4
Cpusets and mempolicy interaction has always been a nightmare and
semantic might get really awkward in some cases. In this case I am not
really sure anybody really does soemthing like that but anyway...
[...]
> -static unsigned int cpuset_mems_nr(unsigned int *array)
> +static nodemask_t *mempolicy_current_bind_nodemask(void)
> +{
> + struct mempolicy *mpol;
> + nodemask_t *nodemask;
> +
> + mpol = get_task_policy(current);
> + if (mpol->mode == MPOL_BIND)
> + nodemask = &mpol->v.nodes;
> + else
> + nodemask = NULL;
> +
> + return nodemask;
> +}
We already have policy_nodemask which tries to do this. Is there any
reason to not reuse it?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-24 7:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-23 7:44 Muchun Song
2020-07-24 7:39 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-07-24 9:04 ` [Phishing Risk] [External] " Muchun Song
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=20200724073942.GE4061@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=guojianchao@bytedance.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.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