All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chintan Pandya <chintan.pandya@oneplus.com>
To: Linux Upstream <linux.upstream@oneplus.com>,
	"hughd@google.com" <hughd@google.com>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"jack@suse.cz" <jack@suse.cz>,
	"mawilcox@microsoft.com" <mawilcox@microsoft.com>,
	"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Chintan Pandya <chintan.pandya@oneplus.com>
Subject: [RFC 0/2] Potential race condition with page lock
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:53:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190211125337.16099-1-chintan.pandya@oneplus.com> (raw)

In 4.14 kernel, observed following 2 BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page)) scenarios.
Both looks to be having similar cause.

Case: 1
[127823.176076] try_to_free_buffers+0xfc/0x108 (BUG_ON(), page lock was freed
                                               somehow)
[127823.176079] jbd2_journal_try_to_free_buffers+0x15c/0x194 (page lock was
                                              available till this function)
[127823.176083] ext4_releasepage+0xe0/0x110 
[127823.176087] try_to_release_page+0x68/0x90 (page lock was available till
                                              this function)
[127823.176090] invalidate_inode_page+0x94/0xa8
[127823.176093] invalidate_mapping_pages_without_uidlru+0xec/0x1a4 (page lock
                                              taken here)
...
...

Case: 2
[<ffffff9547a82fb0>] el1_dbg+0x18
[<ffffff9547bfb544>] __remove_mapping+0x160  (BUG_ON(), page lock is not
                                             available. Some one might have
                                             free'd that.)
[<ffffff9547bfb3c8>] remove_mapping+0x28
[<ffffff9547bf8404>] invalidate_inode_page+0xa4
[<ffffff9547bf8bcc>] invalidate_mapping_pages+0xd4  (acquired the page lock)
[<ffffff9547c7f934>] inode_lru_isolate+0x128
[<ffffff9547c1b500>] __list_lru_walk_one+0x10c
[<ffffff9547c1b3e0>] list_lru_walk_one+0x58
[<ffffff9547c7f7d4>] prune_icache_sb+0x50
[<ffffff9547c64fbc>] super_cache_scan+0xfc
[<ffffff9547bfb17c>] shrink_slab+0x304
[<ffffff9547bffb38>] shrink_node+0x254
[<ffffff9547bfd4fc>] do_try_to_free_pages+0x144
[<ffffff9547bfd2d8>] try_to_free_pages+0x390
[<ffffff9547bebb80>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x940
[<ffffff9547becedc>] __get_free_pages+0x28
[<ffffff9547cd6870>] proc_pid_readlink+0x6c
[<ffffff9547c7075c>] vfs_readlink+0x124
[<ffffff9547c66374>] SyS_readlinkat+0xc8
[<ffffff9547a83818>] __sys_trace_return+0x0

Both the scenarios say that current stack tried taking page lock but got
released in meantime by someone else. There could be 2 possiblities here.

1) Someone trying to update page flags and due to race condition, PG_locked
   bit got cleared, unwantedly.
2) Someone else took the lock without checking if it is really locked or not
   as there are explicit APIs to set PG_locked.

I didn't get traces of history for having PG_locked being set non-atomically.
I believe it could be because of performance reasons. Not sure though.

Chintan Pandya (2):
  page-flags: Make page lock operation atomic
  page-flags: Catch the double setter of page flags

 fs/cifs/file.c             | 8 ++++----
 fs/pipe.c                  | 2 +-
 include/linux/page-flags.h | 4 ++--
 include/linux/pagemap.h    | 6 +++---
 mm/filemap.c               | 4 ++--
 mm/khugepaged.c            | 2 +-
 mm/ksm.c                   | 2 +-
 mm/memory-failure.c        | 2 +-
 mm/memory.c                | 2 +-
 mm/migrate.c               | 2 +-
 mm/shmem.c                 | 6 +++---
 mm/swap_state.c            | 4 ++--
 mm/vmscan.c                | 2 +-
 13 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.1


             reply	other threads:[~2019-02-11 12:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-11 12:53 Chintan Pandya [this message]
2019-02-11 12:53 ` [RFC 1/2] page-flags: Make page lock operation atomic Chintan Pandya
2019-02-11 13:46   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-11 13:59     ` Linux Upstream
2019-02-11 17:48       ` Jan Kara
2019-02-11 17:56         ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-02-12  7:45           ` Jan Kara
2019-02-12 12:29             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-11 12:53 ` [RFC 2/2] page-flags: Catch the double setter of page flags Chintan Pandya
2019-02-11 13:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-11 14:01     ` Linux Upstream

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=20190211125337.16099-1-chintan.pandya@oneplus.com \
    --to=chintan.pandya@oneplus.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux.upstream@oneplus.com \
    --cc=mawilcox@microsoft.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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.