From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mm/kmemleak: Prevent soft lockup in kmemleak_scan()'s object iteration loops
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 13:56:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221020175619.366317-1-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
Commit 6edda04ccc7c ("mm/kmemleak: prevent soft lockup in first object
iteration loop of kmemleak_scan()") adds cond_resched() in the first
object iteration loop of kmemleak_scan(). However, it turns that the
2nd objection iteration loop can still cause soft lockup to happen in
some cases. So add a cond_resched() call in the 2nd and 3rd loops as
well to prevent that and for completeness.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
mm/kmemleak.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c
index 1eddc0132f7f..613d34b57c5d 100644
--- a/mm/kmemleak.c
+++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
@@ -1463,6 +1463,27 @@ static void scan_gray_list(void)
WARN_ON(!list_empty(&gray_list));
}
+/*
+ * Conditionally call resched() in a object iteration loop while making sure
+ * that the given object won't go away without RCU read lock by performing a
+ * get_object() if !pinned.
+ *
+ * Return: false if can't do a cond_resched() due to get_object() failure
+ * true otherwise
+ */
+static bool kmemleak_cond_resched(struct kmemleak_object *object, bool pinned)
+{
+ if (!pinned && !get_object(object))
+ return false;
+
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ cond_resched();
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ if (!pinned)
+ put_object(object);
+ return true;
+}
+
/*
* Scan data sections and all the referenced memory blocks allocated via the
* kernel's standard allocators. This function must be called with the
@@ -1474,7 +1495,7 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
struct zone *zone;
int __maybe_unused i;
int new_leaks = 0;
- int loop1_cnt = 0;
+ int loop_cnt = 0;
jiffies_last_scan = jiffies;
@@ -1483,7 +1504,6 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
list_for_each_entry_rcu(object, &object_list, object_list) {
bool obj_pinned = false;
- loop1_cnt++;
raw_spin_lock_irq(&object->lock);
#ifdef DEBUG
/*
@@ -1517,24 +1537,11 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&object->lock);
/*
- * Do a cond_resched() to avoid soft lockup every 64k objects.
- * Make sure a reference has been taken so that the object
- * won't go away without RCU read lock.
+ * Do a cond_resched() every 64k objects to avoid soft lockup.
*/
- if (!(loop1_cnt & 0xffff)) {
- if (!obj_pinned && !get_object(object)) {
- /* Try the next object instead */
- loop1_cnt--;
- continue;
- }
-
- rcu_read_unlock();
- cond_resched();
- rcu_read_lock();
-
- if (!obj_pinned)
- put_object(object);
- }
+ if (!(++loop_cnt & 0xffff) &&
+ !kmemleak_cond_resched(object, obj_pinned))
+ loop_cnt--; /* Try again on next object */
}
rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -1601,7 +1608,15 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
* scan and color them gray until the next scan.
*/
rcu_read_lock();
+ loop_cnt = 0;
list_for_each_entry_rcu(object, &object_list, object_list) {
+ /*
+ * Do a cond_resched() every 64k objects to avoid soft lockup.
+ */
+ if (!(++loop_cnt & 0xffff) &&
+ !kmemleak_cond_resched(object, false))
+ loop_cnt--; /* Try again on next object */
+
/*
* This is racy but we can save the overhead of lock/unlock
* calls. The missed objects, if any, should be caught in
@@ -1635,7 +1650,15 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
* Scanning result reporting.
*/
rcu_read_lock();
+ loop_cnt = 0;
list_for_each_entry_rcu(object, &object_list, object_list) {
+ /*
+ * Do a cond_resched() every 64k objects to avoid soft lockup.
+ */
+ if (!(++loop_cnt & 0xffff) &&
+ !kmemleak_cond_resched(object, false))
+ loop_cnt--; /* Try again on next object */
+
/*
* This is racy but we can save the overhead of lock/unlock
* calls. The missed objects, if any, should be caught in
--
2.31.1
next reply other threads:[~2022-10-20 17:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-20 17:56 Waiman Long [this message]
2022-10-21 0:58 ` [PATCH] mm/kmemleak: Prevent soft lockup in kmemleak_scan()'s object iteration loops Andrew Morton
2022-10-21 1:22 ` Waiman Long
2022-10-28 13:59 ` Catalin Marinas
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=20221020175619.366317-1-longman@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.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).