From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Weijie Yang <weijie.yang.kh@gmail.com>,
sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dan.magenheimer@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [BUG REPORT] ZSWAP: theoretical race condition issues
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:42 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130819054742.GA28062@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52118042.30101@oracle.com>
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:17:38AM +0800, Bob Liu wrote:
> Hi Weijie,
>
> On 08/19/2013 12:14 AM, Weijie Yang wrote:
> > I found a few bugs in zswap when I review Linux-3.11-rc5, and I have
> > also some questions about it, described as following:
> >
> > BUG:
> > 1. A race condition when reclaim a page
> > when a handle alloced from zbud, zbud considers this handle is used
> > validly by upper(zswap) and can be a candidate for reclaim.
> > But zswap has to initialize it such as setting swapentry and addding
> > it to rbtree. so there is a race condition, such as:
> > thread 0: obtain handle x from zbud_alloc
> > thread 1: zbud_reclaim_page is called
> > thread 1: callback zswap_writeback_entry to reclaim handle x
> > thread 1: get swpentry from handle x (it is random value now)
> > thread 1: bad thing may happen
> > thread 0: initialize handle x with swapentry
Nice catch!
>
> Yes, this may happen potentially but in rare case.
> Because we have a LRU list for page frames, after Thread 0 called
> zbud_alloc the corresponding page will be add to the head of LRU
> list,While zbud_reclaim_page(Thread 1 called) is started from the tail
> of LRU list.
>
> > Of course, this situation almost never happen, it is a "theoretical
> > race condition" issue.
But it's doable and we should prevent that although you feel it's rare
because system could go hang. When I look at the code, Why should zbud
have LRU logic instead of zswap? If I missed some history, sorry about that.
But at least to me, zbud is just allocator so it should have a role
to handle alloc/free object and how client of the allocator uses objects
depends on the upper layer so zbud should handle LRU. If so, we wouldn't
encounter this problem, either.
> >
> > 2. Pollute swapcache data by add a pre-invalided swap page
> > when a swap_entry is invalidated, it will be reused by other anon
> > page. At the same time, zswap is reclaiming old page, pollute
> > swapcache of new page as a result, because old page and new page use
> > the same swap_entry, such as:
> > thread 1: zswap reclaim entry x
> > thread 0: zswap_frontswap_invalidate_page entry x
> > thread 0: entry x reused by other anon page
> > thread 1: add old data to swapcache of entry x
>
> I didn't get your idea here, why thread1 will add old data to entry x?
>
> > thread 0: swapcache of entry x is polluted
> > Of course, this situation almost never happen, it is another
> > "theoretical race condition" issue.
Don't swapcache_prepare close the race?
> >
> > 3. Frontswap uses frontswap_map bitmap to track page in "backend"
> > implementation, when zswap reclaim a
> > page, the corresponding bitmap record is not cleared.
> >
>
> That's true, but I don't think it's a big problem.
> Only waste little time to search rbtree during zswap_frontswap_load().
>
> > 4. zswap_tree is not freed when swapoff, and it got re-kzalloc in
> > swapon, memory leak occurs.
>
> Nice catch! I think it should be freed in zswap_frontswap_invalidate_area().
>
> >
> > questions:
> > 1. How about SetPageReclaim befor __swap_writepage, so that move it to
> > the tail of the inactive list?
It's a good idea to avoid unnecessary page scanning.
>
> It will be added to inactive now.
>
> > 2. zswap uses GFP_KERNEL flag to alloc things in store and reclaim
> > function, does this lead to these function called recursively?
>
> Yes, that's a potential problem.
It should use GFP_NOIO.
>
> > 3. for reclaiming one zbud page which contains two buddies, zswap
> > needs to alloc two pages. Does this reclaim cost-efficient?
It would be better to evict zpage which is a compressed sequence of
PAGE_SIZE bytes rather than decompresesed PAGE_SIZE bytes a page when
we are about to reclaim the page but it's hard part from frontswap API.
> >
>
> Yes, that's a problem too. And that's why we use zbud as the default
> allocator instead of zsmalloc.
> I think improving the write back path of zswap is the next important
> step for zswap.
>
> --
> Regards,
> -Bob
>
> --
> 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>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Weijie Yang <weijie.yang.kh@gmail.com>,
sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dan.magenheimer@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [BUG REPORT] ZSWAP: theoretical race condition issues
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:47:42 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130819054742.GA28062@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52118042.30101@oracle.com>
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:17:38AM +0800, Bob Liu wrote:
> Hi Weijie,
>
> On 08/19/2013 12:14 AM, Weijie Yang wrote:
> > I found a few bugs in zswap when I review Linux-3.11-rc5, and I have
> > also some questions about it, described as following:
> >
> > BUG:
> > 1. A race condition when reclaim a page
> > when a handle alloced from zbud, zbud considers this handle is used
> > validly by upper(zswap) and can be a candidate for reclaim.
> > But zswap has to initialize it such as setting swapentry and addding
> > it to rbtree. so there is a race condition, such as:
> > thread 0: obtain handle x from zbud_alloc
> > thread 1: zbud_reclaim_page is called
> > thread 1: callback zswap_writeback_entry to reclaim handle x
> > thread 1: get swpentry from handle x (it is random value now)
> > thread 1: bad thing may happen
> > thread 0: initialize handle x with swapentry
Nice catch!
>
> Yes, this may happen potentially but in rare case.
> Because we have a LRU list for page frames, after Thread 0 called
> zbud_alloc the corresponding page will be add to the head of LRU
> list,While zbud_reclaim_page(Thread 1 called) is started from the tail
> of LRU list.
>
> > Of course, this situation almost never happen, it is a "theoretical
> > race condition" issue.
But it's doable and we should prevent that although you feel it's rare
because system could go hang. When I look at the code, Why should zbud
have LRU logic instead of zswap? If I missed some history, sorry about that.
But at least to me, zbud is just allocator so it should have a role
to handle alloc/free object and how client of the allocator uses objects
depends on the upper layer so zbud should handle LRU. If so, we wouldn't
encounter this problem, either.
> >
> > 2. Pollute swapcache data by add a pre-invalided swap page
> > when a swap_entry is invalidated, it will be reused by other anon
> > page. At the same time, zswap is reclaiming old page, pollute
> > swapcache of new page as a result, because old page and new page use
> > the same swap_entry, such as:
> > thread 1: zswap reclaim entry x
> > thread 0: zswap_frontswap_invalidate_page entry x
> > thread 0: entry x reused by other anon page
> > thread 1: add old data to swapcache of entry x
>
> I didn't get your idea here, why thread1 will add old data to entry x?
>
> > thread 0: swapcache of entry x is polluted
> > Of course, this situation almost never happen, it is another
> > "theoretical race condition" issue.
Don't swapcache_prepare close the race?
> >
> > 3. Frontswap uses frontswap_map bitmap to track page in "backend"
> > implementation, when zswap reclaim a
> > page, the corresponding bitmap record is not cleared.
> >
>
> That's true, but I don't think it's a big problem.
> Only waste little time to search rbtree during zswap_frontswap_load().
>
> > 4. zswap_tree is not freed when swapoff, and it got re-kzalloc in
> > swapon, memory leak occurs.
>
> Nice catch! I think it should be freed in zswap_frontswap_invalidate_area().
>
> >
> > questions:
> > 1. How about SetPageReclaim befor __swap_writepage, so that move it to
> > the tail of the inactive list?
It's a good idea to avoid unnecessary page scanning.
>
> It will be added to inactive now.
>
> > 2. zswap uses GFP_KERNEL flag to alloc things in store and reclaim
> > function, does this lead to these function called recursively?
>
> Yes, that's a potential problem.
It should use GFP_NOIO.
>
> > 3. for reclaiming one zbud page which contains two buddies, zswap
> > needs to alloc two pages. Does this reclaim cost-efficient?
It would be better to evict zpage which is a compressed sequence of
PAGE_SIZE bytes rather than decompresesed PAGE_SIZE bytes a page when
we are about to reclaim the page but it's hard part from frontswap API.
> >
>
> Yes, that's a problem too. And that's why we use zbud as the default
> allocator instead of zsmalloc.
> I think improving the write back path of zswap is the next important
> step for zswap.
>
> --
> Regards,
> -Bob
>
> --
> 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>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-19 5:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-18 16:14 [BUG REPORT] ZSWAP: theoretical race condition issues Weijie Yang
2013-08-18 16:14 ` Weijie Yang
2013-08-19 2:17 ` Bob Liu
2013-08-19 2:17 ` Bob Liu
2013-08-19 5:47 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2013-08-19 5:47 ` Minchan Kim
2013-08-20 15:22 ` Weijie Yang
2013-08-21 12:11 ` Bob Liu
2013-08-20 15:30 ` Weijie Yang
2013-08-20 15:30 ` Weijie Yang
2013-08-21 7:49 ` Minchan Kim
2013-08-21 7:49 ` Minchan Kim
2013-09-25 8:09 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-25 8:09 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-25 8:31 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-25 8:31 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-25 9:33 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-25 9:33 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-25 10:02 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-25 10:02 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-26 2:06 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-26 2:06 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-26 5:58 ` Minchan Kim
2013-09-26 5:58 ` Minchan Kim
2013-09-26 7:26 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-26 7:26 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-26 7:57 ` Minchan Kim
2013-09-26 7:57 ` Minchan Kim
2013-09-26 8:48 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-26 8:48 ` Weijie Yang
2013-09-26 9:56 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-26 9:56 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-27 4:58 ` Minchan Kim
2013-09-27 4:58 ` Minchan Kim
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=20130819054742.GA28062@bbox \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=bob.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=weijie.yang.kh@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 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.