From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Jan Vorlicek <janvorli@microsoft.com>,
Aditya Mandaleeka <adityam@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: vma_merge: fix vm_page_prot SMP race condition against rmap_walk
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 02:36:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160918003654.GA25048@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1474128315-22726-2-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com>
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> + if (remove_next == 1) {
> + /*
> + * vm_page_prot and vm_flags can be read by the
> + * rmap_walk, for example in remove_migration_ptes(),
> + * so before releasing the rmap locks the permissions
> + * of the expanded vmas must be already the correct
> + * one for the whole merged range.
> + *
> + * mprotect case 8 (which sets remove_next == 1) needs
> + * special handling to provide the above guarantee, as
> + * it is the only case where the "vma" that is being
> + * expanded is the one with the wrong permissions for
> + * the whole merged region. So copy the right
> + * permissions from the next one that is getting
> + * removed before releasing the rmap locks.
> + */
> + vma->vm_page_prot = next->vm_page_prot;
> + vma->vm_flags = next->vm_flags;
> + }
> if (start != vma->vm_start) {
One more thought, doesn't remove_next get set to 1 also in case 7?
I assumed this could be fixed within vma_adjust but case 7 is
indistinguishable from case 8 from within vma_adjust. So the fix has
to move up one level in vma_merge where it's possible to differentiate
case 7 and case 8.
The fact no available testcase is exercising the race with any other
cases of vma_merge except case 8, makes the testing prone for false
negatives (accidentally upstream also initially passed as a false
negative thanks to the pmd_modify in do_numa_page that hidden the most
visible side effect of the bug even in case 8). All I can easily
verify with the testcase is that case 8 is fixed by monitoring any
erroneous do_numa_page execution on non-NUMA guests, and sure thing
case 8 was fixed.
I'll also reconsider how much more complex it is to remove the "area"
vma in case 8, instead of the "next", so that case 8 changes from
PPPPNNNNXXXX->PPPPNNNNNNNN to PPPPNNNNXXXX->PPPPXXXXXXXX, in turn
removing the oddness factor from case 8.
--
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:[~2016-09-18 0:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-15 17:41 [PATCH 0/2] vma_merge vs rmap_walk SMP race condition fix Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-15 17:41 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: vm_page_prot: update with WRITE_ONCE/READ_ONCE Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-15 18:27 ` Rik van Riel
2016-09-15 17:41 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: vma_merge: fix race vm_page_prot race condition against rmap_walk Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-15 18:28 ` Rik van Riel
2016-09-16 18:42 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-09-16 20:54 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-17 16:05 ` [PATCH 0/1] mm: vma_merge: fix vm_page_prot SMP race condition against rmap_walk v2 Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-17 16:05 ` [PATCH 1/1] mm: vma_merge: fix vm_page_prot SMP race condition against rmap_walk Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-18 0:36 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2016-09-19 18:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-19 18:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: vma_adjust: remove superfluous check for next not NULL Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-22 10:36 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: vma_merge: fix vm_page_prot SMP race condition against rmap_walk Hugh Dickins
2016-09-23 19:18 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2016-09-23 20:25 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-09-28 5:09 ` [lkp] [mm] 2129957506: kernel BUG at mm/mmap.c:329! kernel test robot
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=20160918003654.GA25048@redhat.com \
--to=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=adityam@microsoft.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=janvorli@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=riel@redhat.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).