From: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: filemap.c SMP bug in 2.4.0-test* (fwd)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:18:39 -0300 (BRST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008172017450.16454-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva> (raw)
Hi,
it seems that Roger has done some deep puzzling today...
I'm not sure if he found something or not, could somebody
else with a more intimate knowledge of the source take a
look at Roger's idea?
thanks,
Rik
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:25:03 +0200
From: Roger Larsson <roger.larsson@norran.net>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
Subject: Re: filemap.c SMP bug in 2.4.0-test*
Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Roger Larsson wrote:
>
> > One question to ask is what will happen if
> > there are two threads both requesting the
> > same swap page at almost the same time?
> > (a process forking, both threads continue to run
> > on both processors, both ends up in page fault...)
> >
> > there might then be a possibility for a race with
> > the indicated code and the lookup_swap_cache call
> > chain (first fails, second lookup_swap_cache runs
> > before page is fully added...)
>
> The adding happens completely under the pagecache_lock,
> so either it is added or it is not, intermediate states
> are not visible to the other cpus...
>
But I am considering the possibility that __find_page_nolock
is run before the page is actually added. Page gets added
slightly after.
Proc A Proc B
page faults
...
read_swap_cache_async
lookup_swap_cache fails twice page faults (same page)
...
read_swap_cache_async
init of page info (insert in
hash tables...)
lookup_swap_cache
__find_page_nolock
(succeeds, page not active
activate)
lru_cache_add (OUCH)
Is this scenario possible?
I will check tomorrow...
/RogerL
> add_to_page_cache_unique should handle this situation
> just fine ... should and probably does, but I'm still
> not 100% sure ;)
>
> regards,
>
> Rik
> --
> "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!"
> -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000
>
> http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
--
Home page:
http://www.norran.net/nra02596/
--
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.eu.org/Linux-MM/
next reply other threads:[~2000-08-17 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-08-17 23:18 Rik van Riel [this message]
2000-08-18 11:50 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-08-18 12:49 ` Andrea Arcangeli
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=Pine.LNX.4.21.0008172017450.16454-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva \
--to=riel@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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