From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fork: fix oops after fork failure
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 18:38:21 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5036405D.1060204@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120823143312.GA23636@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 08/23/2012 06:33 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 23-08-12 17:08:46, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> When we want to duplicate a new process, dup_task_struct() will undergo
>> a series of allocations. If alloc_thread_info_node() fails, we call
>> free_task_struct() and return.
>>
>> This seems right, but it is not. free_task_struct() will not only free
>> the task struct from the kmem_cache, but will also call
>> arch_release_task_struct(). The problem is that this function is
>> supposed to undo whatever arch-specific work done by
>> arch_dup_task_struct(), that is not yet called at this point. The
>> particular problem I ran accross was that in x86, we will arrive at
>> fpu_free() without having ever allocated it.
>>
>> This code is very ancient, and according to git, it is there since the
>> pre-git era. But forks don't fail that often, so that made it well
>> hidden.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
>> Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
>> index 152d023..b397435 100644
>> --- a/kernel/fork.c
>> +++ b/kernel/fork.c
>> @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static struct task_struct *dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *orig)
>>
>> ti = alloc_thread_info_node(tsk, node);
>> if (!ti) {
>> - free_task_struct(tsk);
>> + kmem_cache_free(task_struct_cachep, tsk);
>
> What about ia64 (or !CONFIG_ARCH_THREAD_INFO_ALLOCATOR in general) which
> doesn't allocate thread_info at all?
They would return something meaningful here anyway, otherwise this would
already error out and exit.
But you actually have a point. Not all architectures (all but ia64) will
allocathe the task struct from the slab... sigh...
Sorry, I will come up with something for this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-23 14:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-23 13:08 [PATCH] fork: fix oops after fork failure Glauber Costa
2012-08-23 14:33 ` Michal Hocko
2012-08-23 14:38 ` Glauber Costa [this message]
2012-08-23 14:38 ` Michal Hocko
2012-08-23 14:45 ` Michal Hocko
2012-08-23 14:43 ` Glauber Costa
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=5036405D.1060204@parallels.com \
--to=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--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.