From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com, brauner@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] pid: drop irq disablement around pidmap_lock
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2025 18:42:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250201174203.GA26042@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250201163106.28912-7-mjguzik@gmail.com>
I'll try to review on Monday, but I see nothing obviously wrong after
a very quick glance. Although I am not sure 4/6 is really useful, but
I won't argue.
However, shouldn't this patch also remove the comment which explains
the possible lock inversion? Above put_pid(),
/*
* Note: disable interrupts while the pidmap_lock is held as an
* interrupt might come in and do read_lock(&tasklist_lock).
*
* If we don't disable interrupts there is a nasty deadlock between
* detach_pid()->free_pid() and another cpu that does
* spin_lock(&pidmap_lock) followed by an interrupt routine that does
* read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
*
* After we clean up the tasklist_lock and know there are no
* irq handlers that take it we can leave the interrupts enabled.
* For now it is easier to be safe than to prove it can't happen.
*/
Oleg.
On 02/01, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>
> It no longer serves any purpose now that the tasklist_lock ->
> pidmap_lock ordering got eliminated.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/pid.c | 23 +++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c
> index 73625f28c166..900193de4232 100644
> --- a/kernel/pid.c
> +++ b/kernel/pid.c
> @@ -115,11 +115,10 @@ static void delayed_put_pid(struct rcu_head *rhp)
> void free_pid(struct pid *pid)
> {
> int i;
> - unsigned long flags;
>
> lockdep_assert_not_held(&tasklist_lock);
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&pidmap_lock, flags);
> + spin_lock(&pidmap_lock);
> for (i = 0; i <= pid->level; i++) {
> struct upid *upid = pid->numbers + i;
> struct pid_namespace *ns = upid->ns;
> @@ -142,7 +141,7 @@ void free_pid(struct pid *pid)
> idr_remove(&ns->idr, upid->nr);
> }
> pidfs_remove_pid(pid);
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pidmap_lock, flags);
> + spin_unlock(&pidmap_lock);
>
> call_rcu(&pid->rcu, delayed_put_pid);
> }
> @@ -210,7 +209,7 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns, pid_t *set_tid,
> }
>
> idr_preload(GFP_KERNEL);
> - spin_lock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_lock(&pidmap_lock);
>
> if (tid) {
> nr = idr_alloc(&tmp->idr, NULL, tid,
> @@ -237,7 +236,7 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns, pid_t *set_tid,
> nr = idr_alloc_cyclic(&tmp->idr, NULL, pid_min,
> pid_max, GFP_ATOMIC);
> }
> - spin_unlock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&pidmap_lock);
> idr_preload_end();
>
> if (nr < 0) {
> @@ -271,7 +270,7 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns, pid_t *set_tid,
>
> upid = pid->numbers + ns->level;
> idr_preload(GFP_KERNEL);
> - spin_lock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_lock(&pidmap_lock);
> if (!(ns->pid_allocated & PIDNS_ADDING))
> goto out_unlock;
> pidfs_add_pid(pid);
> @@ -280,18 +279,18 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns, pid_t *set_tid,
> idr_replace(&upid->ns->idr, pid, upid->nr);
> upid->ns->pid_allocated++;
> }
> - spin_unlock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&pidmap_lock);
> idr_preload_end();
>
> return pid;
>
> out_unlock:
> - spin_unlock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&pidmap_lock);
> idr_preload_end();
> put_pid_ns(ns);
>
> out_free:
> - spin_lock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_lock(&pidmap_lock);
> while (++i <= ns->level) {
> upid = pid->numbers + i;
> idr_remove(&upid->ns->idr, upid->nr);
> @@ -301,7 +300,7 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns, pid_t *set_tid,
> if (ns->pid_allocated == PIDNS_ADDING)
> idr_set_cursor(&ns->idr, 0);
>
> - spin_unlock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&pidmap_lock);
>
> kmem_cache_free(ns->pid_cachep, pid);
> return ERR_PTR(retval);
> @@ -309,9 +308,9 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns, pid_t *set_tid,
>
> void disable_pid_allocation(struct pid_namespace *ns)
> {
> - spin_lock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_lock(&pidmap_lock);
> ns->pid_allocated &= ~PIDNS_ADDING;
> - spin_unlock_irq(&pidmap_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&pidmap_lock);
> }
>
> struct pid *find_pid_ns(int nr, struct pid_namespace *ns)
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-01 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-01 16:31 [PATCH v3 0/6] reduce tasklist_lock hold time on exit and do some Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-01 16:31 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] exit: perform add_device_randomness() without tasklist_lock Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-03 17:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-02-03 17:55 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-01 16:31 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] exit: hoist get_pid() in release_task() outside of tasklist_lock Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-03 19:27 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-02-03 19:35 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-03 20:13 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-02-03 20:22 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-03 20:28 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-02-04 1:51 ` Andrew Morton
2025-02-01 16:31 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] exit: postpone tty_kref_put() until after tasklist_lock is dropped Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-03 18:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-02-03 19:33 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-04 11:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-02-04 12:12 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-01 16:31 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] pid: sprinkle tasklist_lock asserts Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-01 16:31 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] pid: perform free_pid() calls outside of tasklist_lock Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-03 18:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-02-03 19:31 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-03 20:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-02-01 16:31 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] pid: drop irq disablement around pidmap_lock Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-01 17:42 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2025-02-01 17:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-02-01 18:19 ` David Laight
2025-02-01 18:42 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-01 21:51 ` David Laight
2025-02-01 22:00 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-02-02 13:55 ` David Laight
2025-02-02 19:34 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-02-02 20:44 ` David Laight
2025-02-02 22:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-02-03 17:47 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] reduce tasklist_lock hold time on exit and do some Oleg Nesterov
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=20250201174203.GA26042@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mjguzik@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