linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, devel@openvz.org,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] decrement static keys on real destroy time
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 22:37:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120516223715.5d1b4385.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FB46B4C.3000307@parallels.com>

On Thu, 17 May 2012 07:06:52 +0400 Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com> wrote:

> ...
> >> +	else if (val != RESOURCE_MAX) {
> >> +		/*
> >> +		 * ->activated needs to be written after the static_key update.
> >> +		 *  This is what guarantees that the socket activation function
> >> +		 *  is the last one to run. See sock_update_memcg() for details,
> >> +		 *  and note that we don't mark any socket as belonging to this
> >> +		 *  memcg until that flag is up.
> >> +		 *
> >> +		 *  We need to do this, because static_keys will span multiple
> >> +		 *  sites, but we can't control their order. If we mark a socket
> >> +		 *  as accounted, but the accounting functions are not patched in
> >> +		 *  yet, we'll lose accounting.
> >> +		 *
> >> +		 *  We never race with the readers in sock_update_memcg(), because
> >> +		 *  when this value change, the code to process it is not patched in
> >> +		 *  yet.
> >> +		 */
> >> +		if (!cg_proto->activated) {
> >> +			static_key_slow_inc(&memcg_socket_limit_enabled);
> >> +			cg_proto->activated = true;
> >> +		}
> >
> > If two threads run this code concurrently, they can both see
> > cg_proto->activated==false and they will both run
> > static_key_slow_inc().
> >
> > Hopefully there's some locking somewhere which prevents this, but it is
> > unobvious.  We should comment this, probably at the cg_proto.activated
> > definition site.  Or we should fix the bug ;)
> >
> If that happens, locking in static_key_slow_inc will prevent any damage.
> My previous version had explicit code to prevent that, but we were 
> pointed out that this is already part of the static_key expectations, so 
> that was dropped.

This makes no sense.  If two threads run that code concurrently,
key->enabled gets incremented twice.  Nobody anywhere has a record that
this happened so it cannot be undone.  key->enabled is now in an
unknown state.


--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-17  5:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-11 20:11 [PATCH v5 0/2] fix static_key disabling problem in memcg Glauber Costa
2012-05-11 20:11 ` [PATCH v5 1/2] Always free struct memcg through schedule_work() Glauber Costa
2012-05-14  0:56   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-05-11 20:11 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] decrement static keys on real destroy time Glauber Costa
2012-05-14  0:59   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-05-16  6:03     ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-16  7:04       ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-16  8:28         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-05-16  8:30           ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-16  8:37           ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-14  1:38   ` Li Zefan
2012-05-16  7:03     ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-16 20:57       ` Andrew Morton
2012-05-14 18:12   ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-16 21:06   ` Andrew Morton
2012-05-17  3:06     ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-17  5:37       ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-05-17  9:52         ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-17 10:18           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-05-17 10:22             ` Glauber Costa
2012-05-17 10:27               ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-05-17 15:19           ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-17 17:02           ` Andrew Morton
2012-05-16 21:13   ` Andrew Morton
2012-05-17  0:07     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-05-17  3:09     ` 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=20120516223715.5d1b4385.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=devel@openvz.org \
    --cc=glommer@parallels.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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 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).