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>
next prev parent 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).