From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: miaox@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] cpuset,mm: use rwlock to protect task->mempolicy and mems_allowed
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:50:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100303155004.5f9e793e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B8E3F77.6070201@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:52:39 +0800
Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> if MAX_NUMNODES > BITS_PER_LONG, loading/storing task->mems_allowed or mems_allowed in
> task->mempolicy are not atomic operations, and the kernel page allocator gets an empty
> mems_allowed when updating task->mems_allowed or mems_allowed in task->mempolicy. So we
> use a rwlock to protect them to fix this probelm.
Boy, that is one big ugly patch. Is there no other way of doing this?
>
> ...
>
> --- a/include/linux/mempolicy.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mempolicy.h
> @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ enum {
> */
> #define MPOL_F_SHARED (1 << 0) /* identify shared policies */
> #define MPOL_F_LOCAL (1 << 1) /* preferred local allocation */
> +#define MPOL_F_TASK (1 << 2) /* identify tasks' policies */
What's this? It wasn't mentioned in the changelog - I suspect it
should have been?
>
> ...
>
> +int cpuset_mems_allowed_intersects(struct task_struct *tsk1,
> + struct task_struct *tsk2)
> {
> - return nodes_intersects(tsk1->mems_allowed, tsk2->mems_allowed);
> + unsigned long flags1, flags2;
> + int retval;
> +
> + read_mem_lock_irqsave(tsk1, flags1);
> + read_mem_lock_irqsave(tsk2, flags2);
> + retval = nodes_intersects(tsk1->mems_allowed, tsk2->mems_allowed);
> + read_mem_unlock_irqrestore(tsk2, flags2);
> + read_mem_unlock_irqrestore(tsk1, flags1);
I suspect this is deadlockable in sufficiently arcane circumstances:
one task takes the locks in a,b order, another task takes them in b,a
order and a third task gets in at the right time and does a
write_lock(). Probably that's not possible for some reason, dunno. The usual
way of solving this is to always take the locks in
sorted-by-ascending-virtual-address order.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-03 23:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-03 10:52 [PATCH 4/4] cpuset,mm: use rwlock to protect task->mempolicy and mems_allowed Miao Xie
2010-03-03 23:50 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-03-04 9:03 ` Miao Xie
2010-03-04 3:30 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-04 9:36 ` Miao Xie
2010-03-04 14:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-04 16:34 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-04 4:53 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-04 14:31 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-05 13:05 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-05 12:03 ` Paul Menage
2010-03-07 2:33 ` Miao Xie
2010-03-09 19:42 ` Paul Menage
2010-03-11 5:04 ` Miao Xie
2010-03-11 5:30 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-11 7:57 ` Miao Xie
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=20100303155004.5f9e793e.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=rientjes@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).