From: zhouchengming <zhouchengming1@huawei.com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hughd@google.com,
kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, vbabka@suse.cz,
geliangtang@163.com, minchan@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, guohanjun@huawei.com,
dingtianhong@huawei.com, huawei.libin@huawei.com,
thunder.leizhen@huawei.com, qiuxishi@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ksm: fix conflict between mmput and scan_get_next_rmap_item
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 11:07:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <572C0A57.7020904@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160505215731.GK28755@redhat.com>
On 2016/5/6 5:57, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hello Zhou,
>
> Great catch.
>
> On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 08:42:56PM +0800, Zhou Chengming wrote:
>> remove_trailing_rmap_items(slot, ksm_scan.rmap_list);
>> + up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>>
>> spin_lock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
>> ksm_scan.mm_slot = list_entry(slot->mm_list.next,
>> @@ -1666,16 +1667,12 @@ next_mm:
>> */
>> hash_del(&slot->link);
>> list_del(&slot->mm_list);
>> - spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
>>
>> free_mm_slot(slot);
>> clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGEABLE,&mm->flags);
>> - up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>> mmdrop(mm);
>
> I thought the mmap_sem for reading prevented a race of the above
> clear_bit against a concurrent madvise(MADV_MERGEABLE) which takes the
> mmap_sem for writing. After this change can't __ksm_enter run
> concurrently with the clear_bit above introducing a different SMP race
> condition?
>
Yes, I didn't notice this problem... Thanks.
>> - } else {
>> - spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
>> - up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
> The strict obviously safe fix is just to invert the above two,
> up_read; spin_unlock.
>
> Then I found another instance of this same SMP race condition in
> unmerge_and_remove_all_rmap_items() that you didn't fix.
>
> Actually for the other instance of the bug the implementation above
> that releases the mmap_sem early sounds safe, because it's a
> ksm_text_exit that takes the clear_bit path, not just the fact we
> didn't find a vma with VM_MERGEABLE set and we garbage collect the
> mm_slot, while the "mm" may still alive. In the other case the "mm"
> isn't alive anymore so the race with MADV_MERGEABLE shouldn't be
> possible to materialize.
>
> Could you fix it by just inverting the up_read/spin_unlock order, in
> the place you patched, and add this comment:
>
> } else {
> /*
> * up_read(&mm->mmap_sem) first because after
> * spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock) run, the "mm" may
> * already have been freed under us by __ksm_exit()
> * because the "mm_slot" is still hashed and
> * ksm_scan.mm_slot doesn't point to it anymore.
> */
> up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
> }
>
> And in unmerge_and_remove_all_rmap_items() same thing, except there
> you can apply your up_read() early and you can just drop the "else"
> clause.
>
> .
>
Your change is better and the comment is good and clear.
So I will send a PATCH v2 based on your suggestion. Thanks.
--
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: zhouchengming <zhouchengming1@huawei.com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <hughd@google.com>,
<kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>, <vbabka@suse.cz>,
<geliangtang@163.com>, <minchan@kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
<dingtianhong@huawei.com>, <huawei.libin@huawei.com>,
<thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>, <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ksm: fix conflict between mmput and scan_get_next_rmap_item
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 11:07:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <572C0A57.7020904@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160505215731.GK28755@redhat.com>
On 2016/5/6 5:57, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hello Zhou,
>
> Great catch.
>
> On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 08:42:56PM +0800, Zhou Chengming wrote:
>> remove_trailing_rmap_items(slot, ksm_scan.rmap_list);
>> + up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>>
>> spin_lock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
>> ksm_scan.mm_slot = list_entry(slot->mm_list.next,
>> @@ -1666,16 +1667,12 @@ next_mm:
>> */
>> hash_del(&slot->link);
>> list_del(&slot->mm_list);
>> - spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
>>
>> free_mm_slot(slot);
>> clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGEABLE,&mm->flags);
>> - up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>> mmdrop(mm);
>
> I thought the mmap_sem for reading prevented a race of the above
> clear_bit against a concurrent madvise(MADV_MERGEABLE) which takes the
> mmap_sem for writing. After this change can't __ksm_enter run
> concurrently with the clear_bit above introducing a different SMP race
> condition?
>
Yes, I didn't notice this problem... Thanks.
>> - } else {
>> - spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
>> - up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
> The strict obviously safe fix is just to invert the above two,
> up_read; spin_unlock.
>
> Then I found another instance of this same SMP race condition in
> unmerge_and_remove_all_rmap_items() that you didn't fix.
>
> Actually for the other instance of the bug the implementation above
> that releases the mmap_sem early sounds safe, because it's a
> ksm_text_exit that takes the clear_bit path, not just the fact we
> didn't find a vma with VM_MERGEABLE set and we garbage collect the
> mm_slot, while the "mm" may still alive. In the other case the "mm"
> isn't alive anymore so the race with MADV_MERGEABLE shouldn't be
> possible to materialize.
>
> Could you fix it by just inverting the up_read/spin_unlock order, in
> the place you patched, and add this comment:
>
> } else {
> /*
> * up_read(&mm->mmap_sem) first because after
> * spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock) run, the "mm" may
> * already have been freed under us by __ksm_exit()
> * because the "mm_slot" is still hashed and
> * ksm_scan.mm_slot doesn't point to it anymore.
> */
> up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock);
> }
>
> And in unmerge_and_remove_all_rmap_items() same thing, except there
> you can apply your up_read() early and you can just drop the "else"
> clause.
>
> .
>
Your change is better and the comment is good and clear.
So I will send a PATCH v2 based on your suggestion. Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-06 3:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-05 12:42 [PATCH] ksm: fix conflict between mmput and scan_get_next_rmap_item Zhou Chengming
2016-05-05 12:42 ` Zhou Chengming
2016-05-05 21:07 ` Andrew Morton
2016-05-05 21:07 ` Andrew Morton
2016-05-06 2:50 ` zhouchengming
2016-05-06 2:50 ` zhouchengming
2016-05-07 4:04 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-05-07 4:04 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-05-08 6:46 ` zhouchengming
2016-05-08 6:46 ` zhouchengming
2016-05-05 21:57 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2016-05-05 21:57 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2016-05-06 2:54 ` Ding Tianhong
2016-05-06 2:54 ` Ding Tianhong
2016-05-06 3:07 ` zhouchengming [this message]
2016-05-06 3:07 ` zhouchengming
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=572C0A57.7020904@huawei.com \
--to=zhouchengming1@huawei.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
--cc=geliangtang@163.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=huawei.libin@huawei.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=thunder.leizhen@huawei.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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.