All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,migration: Prevent rmap_walk_[anon|ksm] seeing the wrong VMA information
Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 10:54:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100506095422.GA20979@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p2s28c262361005060247m2983625clff01aeaa1668402f@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 06:47:12PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 11:02:25AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, 5 May 2010, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >> >
> >> > If the same_vma list is properly ordered then maybe something like the
> >> > following is allowed?
> >>
> >> Heh. This is the same logic I just sent out. However:
> >>
> >> > +   anon_vma = page_rmapping(page);
> >> > +   if (!anon_vma)
> >> > +           return NULL;
> >> > +
> >> > +   spin_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
> >>
> >> RCU should guarantee that this spin_lock() is valid, but:
> >>
> >> > +   /*
> >> > +    * Get the oldest anon_vma on the list by depending on the ordering
> >> > +    * of the same_vma list setup by __page_set_anon_rmap
> >> > +    */
> >> > +   avc = list_entry(&anon_vma->head, struct anon_vma_chain, same_anon_vma);
> >>
> >> We're not guaranteed that the 'anon_vma->head' list is non-empty.
> >>
> >> Somebody could have freed the list and the anon_vma and we have a stale
> >> 'page->anon_vma' (that has just not been _released_ yet).
> >>
> >> And shouldn't that be 'list_first_entry'? Or &anon_vma->head.next?
> >>
> >> How did that line actually work for you? Or was it just a "it boots", but
> >> no actual testing of the rmap walk?
> >>
> >
> > This is what I just started testing on a 4-core machine. Lockdep didn't
> > complain but there are two potential sources of badness in anon_vma_lock_root
> > marked with XXX. The second is the most important because I can't see how the
> > local and root anon_vma locks can be safely swapped - i.e. release local and
> > get the root without the root disappearing. I haven't considered the other
> > possibilities yet such as always locking the root anon_vma. Going to
> > sleep on it.
> >
> > Any comments?
> 
> <snip>
> > +/* Given an anon_vma, find the root of the chain, lock it and return the root */
> > +struct anon_vma *anon_vma_lock_root(struct anon_vma *anon_vma)
> > +{
> > +       struct anon_vma *root_anon_vma;
> > +       struct anon_vma_chain *avc, *root_avc;
> > +       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > +
> > +       /* Lock the same_anon_vma list and make sure we are on a chain */
> > +       spin_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
> > +       if (list_empty(&anon_vma->head)) {
> > +               spin_unlock(&anon_vma->lock);
> > +               return NULL;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       /*
> > +        * Get the root anon_vma on the list by depending on the ordering
> > +        * of the same_vma list setup by __page_set_anon_rmap. Basically
> > +        * we are doing
> > +        *
> > +        * local anon_vma -> local vma -> deepest vma -> anon_vma
> > +        */
> > +       avc = list_first_entry(&anon_vma->head, struct anon_vma_chain, same_anon_vma);
> 
> Dumb question.
> 
> I can't understand why we should use list_first_entry.
> 
> I looked over the code.
> anon_vma_chain_link uses list_add_tail so I think that's right.
> But anon_vma_prepare uses list_add. So it's not consistent.
> How do we make sure list_first_entry returns deepest vma?
> 

list_first_entry is not getting the root (what you called deepest but lets
pick a name and stick with it or this will be worse than it already is). That
list_first entry is what gets us from

local anon_vma -> avc for the local anon_vma -> local vma

It's the ordering of the same_vma list hanging off the local_vma that is
important according to this comment in __page_set_anon_rmap

                /*
                 * The page may be shared between multiple processes.
                 * We must use the _oldest_ possible anon_vma for the
                 * page mapping!  That anon_vma is guaranteed to be
                 * present in all processes that could share this page.
                 *
                 * So take the last AVC chain entry in the vma, which is the
                 * deepest ancestor, and use the anon_vma from that.
                 */
                avc = list_entry(vma->anon_vma_chain.prev, struct anon_vma_chain, same_vma);
                anon_vma = avc->anon_vma;
        }

> Sorry if I am missing.
> 

Not at all. The more people that look at this the better.

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,migration: Prevent rmap_walk_[anon|ksm] seeing the wrong VMA information
Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 10:54:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100506095422.GA20979@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p2s28c262361005060247m2983625clff01aeaa1668402f@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 06:47:12PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 11:02:25AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, 5 May 2010, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >> >
> >> > If the same_vma list is properly ordered then maybe something like the
> >> > following is allowed?
> >>
> >> Heh. This is the same logic I just sent out. However:
> >>
> >> > +   anon_vma = page_rmapping(page);
> >> > +   if (!anon_vma)
> >> > +           return NULL;
> >> > +
> >> > +   spin_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
> >>
> >> RCU should guarantee that this spin_lock() is valid, but:
> >>
> >> > +   /*
> >> > +    * Get the oldest anon_vma on the list by depending on the ordering
> >> > +    * of the same_vma list setup by __page_set_anon_rmap
> >> > +    */
> >> > +   avc = list_entry(&anon_vma->head, struct anon_vma_chain, same_anon_vma);
> >>
> >> We're not guaranteed that the 'anon_vma->head' list is non-empty.
> >>
> >> Somebody could have freed the list and the anon_vma and we have a stale
> >> 'page->anon_vma' (that has just not been _released_ yet).
> >>
> >> And shouldn't that be 'list_first_entry'? Or &anon_vma->head.next?
> >>
> >> How did that line actually work for you? Or was it just a "it boots", but
> >> no actual testing of the rmap walk?
> >>
> >
> > This is what I just started testing on a 4-core machine. Lockdep didn't
> > complain but there are two potential sources of badness in anon_vma_lock_root
> > marked with XXX. The second is the most important because I can't see how the
> > local and root anon_vma locks can be safely swapped - i.e. release local and
> > get the root without the root disappearing. I haven't considered the other
> > possibilities yet such as always locking the root anon_vma. Going to
> > sleep on it.
> >
> > Any comments?
> 
> <snip>
> > +/* Given an anon_vma, find the root of the chain, lock it and return the root */
> > +struct anon_vma *anon_vma_lock_root(struct anon_vma *anon_vma)
> > +{
> > +       struct anon_vma *root_anon_vma;
> > +       struct anon_vma_chain *avc, *root_avc;
> > +       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > +
> > +       /* Lock the same_anon_vma list and make sure we are on a chain */
> > +       spin_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
> > +       if (list_empty(&anon_vma->head)) {
> > +               spin_unlock(&anon_vma->lock);
> > +               return NULL;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       /*
> > +        * Get the root anon_vma on the list by depending on the ordering
> > +        * of the same_vma list setup by __page_set_anon_rmap. Basically
> > +        * we are doing
> > +        *
> > +        * local anon_vma -> local vma -> deepest vma -> anon_vma
> > +        */
> > +       avc = list_first_entry(&anon_vma->head, struct anon_vma_chain, same_anon_vma);
> 
> Dumb question.
> 
> I can't understand why we should use list_first_entry.
> 
> I looked over the code.
> anon_vma_chain_link uses list_add_tail so I think that's right.
> But anon_vma_prepare uses list_add. So it's not consistent.
> How do we make sure list_first_entry returns deepest vma?
> 

list_first_entry is not getting the root (what you called deepest but lets
pick a name and stick with it or this will be worse than it already is). That
list_first entry is what gets us from

local anon_vma -> avc for the local anon_vma -> local vma

It's the ordering of the same_vma list hanging off the local_vma that is
important according to this comment in __page_set_anon_rmap

                /*
                 * The page may be shared between multiple processes.
                 * We must use the _oldest_ possible anon_vma for the
                 * page mapping!  That anon_vma is guaranteed to be
                 * present in all processes that could share this page.
                 *
                 * So take the last AVC chain entry in the vma, which is the
                 * deepest ancestor, and use the anon_vma from that.
                 */
                avc = list_entry(vma->anon_vma_chain.prev, struct anon_vma_chain, same_vma);
                anon_vma = avc->anon_vma;
        }

> Sorry if I am missing.
> 

Not at all. The more people that look at this the better.

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab

--
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-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-06  9:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 100+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-05 13:14 [PATCH 0/2] Fix migration races in rmap_walk() V5 Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 13:14 ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 13:14 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm,migration: Prevent rmap_walk_[anon|ksm] seeing the wrong VMA information Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 13:14   ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 14:34   ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 14:34     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 14:56     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 14:56       ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 15:31       ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 15:31         ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 15:54         ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 15:54           ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 16:13           ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-05 16:13             ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-05 19:11             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-05 19:11               ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-05 19:57               ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-05 19:57                 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-21  0:27               ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-21  0:27                 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-06 10:37             ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 10:37               ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 17:34           ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 17:34             ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 17:57             ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 17:57               ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 18:14             ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 18:14               ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 18:34               ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 18:34                 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 11:03                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 11:03                   ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 13:40             ` Rik van Riel
2010-05-06 13:40               ` Rik van Riel
2010-05-06 13:45               ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 13:45                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 17:53         ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 17:53           ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 18:02           ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 18:02             ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-05 18:17             ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 18:17               ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06  0:22             ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06  0:22               ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06  0:42               ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06  0:42                 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 10:02                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 10:02                   ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 14:15                   ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 14:15                     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 14:25                     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 14:25                       ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06  9:47               ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-06  9:47                 ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-06  9:54                 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2010-05-06  9:54                   ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 10:01                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-06 10:01                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-06 10:10                     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 10:10                       ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 14:06                 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 14:06                   ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 15:59                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-06 15:59                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-05-06  7:38   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-06  7:38     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-06  9:46     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06  9:46       ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 23:52       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-06 23:52         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-07  5:49         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-07  5:49           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-05 13:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm,migration: Fix race between shift_arg_pages and rmap_walk by guaranteeing rmap_walk finds PTEs created within the temporary stack Mel Gorman
2010-05-05 13:14   ` Mel Gorman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-06 15:33 [PATCH 0/2] Fix migration races in rmap_walk() V6 Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 15:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm,migration: Prevent rmap_walk_[anon|ksm] seeing the wrong VMA information Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 15:33   ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 15:44   ` Rik van Riel
2010-05-06 15:44     ` Rik van Riel
2010-05-06 15:51     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 15:51       ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 15:59   ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 15:59     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06 17:07     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 17:07       ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 23:20 [PATCH 0/2] Fix migration races in rmap_walk() V7 Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 23:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm,migration: Prevent rmap_walk_[anon|ksm] seeing the wrong VMA information Mel Gorman
2010-05-06 23:20   ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-07  0:56   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-07  0:56     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-05-07 16:26     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-07 16:26       ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-08 15:39   ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-08 15:39     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-08 17:02     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-08 17:02       ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-08 18:04       ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-08 18:04         ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-05-08 19:51         ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-08 19:51           ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-09 19:23     ` Mel Gorman
2010-05-09 19:23       ` Mel Gorman

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=20100506095422.GA20979@csn.ul.ie \
    --to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.