linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mempolicy: fix lock contention on mems_allowed
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:09:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YvTHX2Jijb8Z3LB5@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7ece0714-2646-4f1a-60b6-aaafc1135b1e@bytedance.com>

On Thu 11-08-22 16:43:28, Abel Wu wrote:
> On 8/9/22 8:11 PM, Michal Hocko Wrote:
> > On Tue 09-08-22 18:49:27, Abel Wu wrote:
> > > The mems_allowed field can be modified by other tasks, so it
> > > isn't safe to access it with alloc_lock unlocked even in the
> > > current process context.
> > 
> > It would be useful to describe the racing scenario and the effect it
> > would have. 78b132e9bae9 hasn't really explained thinking behind and why
> > it was considered safe to drop the lock. I assume it was based on the
> > fact that the operation happens on the current task but this is hard to
> > tell.
> > 
> 
> Sorry for my poor description. Say there are two tasks: A from cpusetA
> is performing set_mempolicy(2), and B is changing cpusetA's cpuset.mems.
> 
>     A (set_mempolicy)		B (echo xx > cpuset.mems)
> 
>     pol = mpol_new();
> 				update_tasks_nodemask(cpusetA) {
> 				  foreach t in cpusetA {
> 				    cpuset_change_task_nodemask(t) {
> 				      task_lock(t); // t could be A
>     mpol_set_nodemask(pol) {
>       new = f(A->mems_allowed);
> 				      update t->mems_allowed;
>       pol.create(pol, new);
>     }
> 				      task_unlock(t);
>     task_lock(A);
>     A->mempolicy = pol;
>     task_unlock(A);
> 				    }
> 				  }
> 				}
> 
> In this case A's pol->nodes is computed by old mems_allowed, and could
> be inconsistent with A's new mems_allowed.
> 
> While it is different when replacing vmas' policy: the pol->nodes is
> gone wild only when current_cpuset_is_being_rebound():
> 
>     A (mbind)			B (echo xx > cpuset.mems)
> 
> 				cpuset_being_rebound = cpusetA;
> 				update_tasks_nodemask(cpusetA) {
> 				  foreach t in cpusetA {
> 				    cpuset_change_task_nodemask(t) {
> 				      task_lock(t); // t could be A
>     pol = mpol_new();
>     mmap_write_lock(A->mm);
>     mpol_set_nodemask(pol) {
>       mask = f(A->mems_allowed);
> 				      update t->mems_allowed;
>       pol.create(pol, mask);
>     }
> 				      task_unlock(t);
> 				    }
>     foreach v in A->mm {
>       if (current_cpuset_is_being_rebound())
>         pol.rebind(pol, cpuset.mems);
>       v->vma_policy = pol;
>     }
>     mmap_write_unlock(A->mm);
> 				    mmap_write_lock(t->mm);
> 				    mpol_rebind_mm(t->mm);
> 				    mmap_write_unlock(t->mm);
> 				  }
> 				}
> 				cpuset_being_rebound = NULL;
> 
> In this case, the cpuset.mems, which has already done updating, is
> finally used for calculating pol->nodes, rather than A->mems_allowed.
> So it is OK to call mpol_set_nodemask() with alloc_lock unlocked when
> doing mbind(2).

Please add this to the patch changelog.

Thanks!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


      reply	other threads:[~2022-08-11  9:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-09 10:49 Abel Wu
2022-08-09 12:11 ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-11  8:43   ` Abel Wu
2022-08-11  9:09     ` Michal Hocko [this message]

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=YvTHX2Jijb8Z3LB5@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=wuyun.abel@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