[PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[David Mackey]

From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>

From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>

slab_node() could access current->mempolicy from interrupt context.
However there's a race condition during exit where the mempolicy
is first freed and then the pointer zeroed.

Using this from interrupts seems bogus anyways. The interrupt
will interrupt a random process and therefore get a random
mempolicy. Many times, this will be idle's, which noone can change.

Just disable this here and always use local for slab
from interrupts. I also cleaned up the callers of slab_node a bit
which always passed the same argument.

I believe the original mempolicy code did that in fact,
so it's likely a regression.

v2: send version with correct logic
v3: simplify. fix typo.
Reported-by: Arun Sharma <asharma@fb.com>
Cc: penberg@kernel.org
Cc: cl@linux.com
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
[tdmackey@twitter.com: Rework control flow based on feedback from
cl@linux.com, fix logic, and cleanup current task_struct reference]
Signed-off-by: David Mackey <tdmackey@twitter.com>
---
 include/linux/mempolicy.h |    2 +-
 mm/mempolicy.c            |    8 +++++++-
 mm/slab.c                 |    4 ++--
 mm/slub.c                 |    2 +-
 4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/mempolicy.h b/include/linux/mempolicy.h
index 4aa4273..95b738c 100644
--- a/include/linux/mempolicy.h
+++ b/include/linux/mempolicy.h
@@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ extern struct zonelist *huge_zonelist(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 extern bool init_nodemask_of_mempolicy(nodemask_t *mask);
 extern bool mempolicy_nodemask_intersects(struct task_struct *tsk,
 				const nodemask_t *mask);
-extern unsigned slab_node(struct mempolicy *policy);
+extern unsigned slab_node(void);
 
 extern enum zone_type policy_zone;
 
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index f15c1b2..cb0b230 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1602,8 +1602,14 @@ static unsigned interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
  * task can change it's policy.  The system default policy requires no
  * such protection.
  */
-unsigned slab_node(struct mempolicy *policy)
+unsigned slab_node(void)
 {
+	struct mempolicy *policy;
+
+	if (in_interrupt())
+		return numa_node_id();
+
+	policy = current->mempolicy;
 	if (!policy || policy->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)
 		return numa_node_id();
 
diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
index e901a36..af3b405 100644
--- a/mm/slab.c
+++ b/mm/slab.c
@@ -3336,7 +3336,7 @@ static void *alternate_node_alloc(struct kmem_cache *cachep, gfp_t flags)
 	if (cpuset_do_slab_mem_spread() && (cachep->flags & SLAB_MEM_SPREAD))
 		nid_alloc = cpuset_slab_spread_node();
 	else if (current->mempolicy)
-		nid_alloc = slab_node(current->mempolicy);
+		nid_alloc = slab_node();
 	if (nid_alloc != nid_here)
 		return ____cache_alloc_node(cachep, flags, nid_alloc);
 	return NULL;
@@ -3368,7 +3368,7 @@ static void *fallback_alloc(struct kmem_cache *cache, gfp_t flags)
 
 retry_cpuset:
 	cpuset_mems_cookie = get_mems_allowed();
-	zonelist = node_zonelist(slab_node(current->mempolicy), flags);
+	zonelist = node_zonelist(slab_node(), flags);
 
 retry:
 	/*
diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
index 8c691fa..0d9241a 100644
--- a/mm/slub.c
+++ b/mm/slub.c
@@ -1617,7 +1617,7 @@ static void *get_any_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags,
 
 	do {
 		cpuset_mems_cookie = get_mems_allowed();
-		zonelist = node_zonelist(slab_node(current->mempolicy), flags);
+		zonelist = node_zonelist(slab_node(), flags);
 		for_each_zone_zonelist(zone, z, zonelist, high_zoneidx) {
 			struct kmem_cache_node *n;
 
-- 
1.7.4.1

--
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>

Re: [PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[David Rientjes]

On Sat, 9 Jun 2012, David Mackey wrote:

> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index f15c1b2..cb0b230 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -1602,8 +1602,14 @@ static unsigned interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
>   * task can change it's policy.  The system default policy requires no
>   * such protection.
>   */
> -unsigned slab_node(struct mempolicy *policy)
> +unsigned slab_node(void)
>  {
> +	struct mempolicy *policy;
> +
> +	if (in_interrupt())
> +		return numa_node_id();
> +
> +	policy = current->mempolicy;
>  	if (!policy || policy->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)
>  		return numa_node_id();
>  

Should probably be numa_mem_id() in both these cases for 
CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES, but it won't cause a problem in this form 
either.

Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>

--
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>

Re: [PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[David Rientjes]

On Sat, 9 Jun 2012, David Rientjes wrote:

> On Sat, 9 Jun 2012, David Mackey wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> > index f15c1b2..cb0b230 100644
> > --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> > +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> > @@ -1602,8 +1602,14 @@ static unsigned interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
> >   * task can change it's policy.  The system default policy requires no
> >   * such protection.
> >   */
> > -unsigned slab_node(struct mempolicy *policy)
> > +unsigned slab_node(void)
> >  {
> > +	struct mempolicy *policy;
> > +
> > +	if (in_interrupt())
> > +		return numa_node_id();
> > +
> > +	policy = current->mempolicy;
> >  	if (!policy || policy->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)
> >  		return numa_node_id();
> >  
> 
> Should probably be numa_mem_id() in both these cases for 
> CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES, but it won't cause a problem in this form 
> either.
> 
> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> 

Still missing from linux-next, who's going to pick this up?

--
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>

Re: [PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[Pekka Enberg]

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 4:11 AM, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2012, David Rientjes wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 9 Jun 2012, David Mackey wrote:
>>
>> > diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> > index f15c1b2..cb0b230 100644
>> > --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
>> > +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> > @@ -1602,8 +1602,14 @@ static unsigned interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
>> >   * task can change it's policy.  The system default policy requires no
>> >   * such protection.
>> >   */
>> > -unsigned slab_node(struct mempolicy *policy)
>> > +unsigned slab_node(void)
>> >  {
>> > +   struct mempolicy *policy;
>> > +
>> > +   if (in_interrupt())
>> > +           return numa_node_id();
>> > +
>> > +   policy = current->mempolicy;
>> >     if (!policy || policy->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)
>> >             return numa_node_id();
>> >
>>
>> Should probably be numa_mem_id() in both these cases for
>> CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES, but it won't cause a problem in this form
>> either.
>>
>> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
>>
>
> Still missing from linux-next, who's going to pick this up?

I'm going to pick it up. I've been postponing merging it until dust
has settled from Christoph's "common slab" patch series.

--
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>

Re: [PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[Christoph Lameter]

On Sat, 9 Jun 2012, David Mackey wrote:

> I believe the original mempolicy code did that in fact,
> so it's likely a regression.

Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>

--
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>

Re: [PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

(6/9/12 5:40 AM), David Mackey wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen<ak@linux.intel.com>
> 
> From: Andi Kleen<ak@linux.intel.com>
> 
> slab_node() could access current->mempolicy from interrupt context.
> However there's a race condition during exit where the mempolicy
> is first freed and then the pointer zeroed.
> 
> Using this from interrupts seems bogus anyways. The interrupt
> will interrupt a random process and therefore get a random
> mempolicy. Many times, this will be idle's, which noone can change.
> 
> Just disable this here and always use local for slab
> from interrupts. I also cleaned up the callers of slab_node a bit
> which always passed the same argument.
> 
> I believe the original mempolicy code did that in fact,
> so it's likely a regression.
> 
> v2: send version with correct logic
> v3: simplify. fix typo.
> Reported-by: Arun Sharma<asharma@fb.com>
> Cc: penberg@kernel.org
> Cc: cl@linux.com
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen<ak@linux.intel.com>
> [tdmackey@twitter.com: Rework control flow based on feedback from
> cl@linux.com, fix logic, and cleanup current task_struct reference]
> Signed-off-by: David Mackey<tdmackey@twitter.com>

Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>




--
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>

Re: [PATCH v5] slab/mempolicy: always use local policy from interrupt context

[Pekka Enberg]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> wrote:
> (6/9/12 5:40 AM), David Mackey wrote:
>> From: Andi Kleen<ak@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> From: Andi Kleen<ak@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> slab_node() could access current->mempolicy from interrupt context.
>> However there's a race condition during exit where the mempolicy
>> is first freed and then the pointer zeroed.
>>
>> Using this from interrupts seems bogus anyways. The interrupt
>> will interrupt a random process and therefore get a random
>> mempolicy. Many times, this will be idle's, which noone can change.
>>
>> Just disable this here and always use local for slab
>> from interrupts. I also cleaned up the callers of slab_node a bit
>> which always passed the same argument.
>>
>> I believe the original mempolicy code did that in fact,
>> so it's likely a regression.
>>
>> v2: send version with correct logic
>> v3: simplify. fix typo.
>> Reported-by: Arun Sharma<asharma@fb.com>
>> Cc: penberg@kernel.org
>> Cc: cl@linux.com
>> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen<ak@linux.intel.com>
>> [tdmackey@twitter.com: Rework control flow based on feedback from
>> cl@linux.com, fix logic, and cleanup current task_struct reference]
>> Signed-off-by: David Mackey<tdmackey@twitter.com>
>
> Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>

Applied, 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>