From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh904.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.202]) by ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l1JERF6M246518 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:27:15 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.244]) by sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.2) with ESMTP id l1JEDerM128732 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:13:40 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l1JEAAED017066 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2007 01:10:10 +1100 Message-ID: <45D9AFBE.5020107@in.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:40:06 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@in.ibm.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH][2/4] Add RSS accounting and control References: <20070219065019.3626.33947.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop> <20070219065034.3626.2658.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop> <20070219005828.3b774d8f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45D97DF8.5080000@in.ibm.com> <20070219030141.42c65bc0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45D9856D.1070902@in.ibm.com> <20070219032352.2856af36.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45D9906F.2090605@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830702190409x4f64e56ex4044a12d949e44af@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6599ad830702190409x4f64e56ex4044a12d949e44af@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Paul Menage Cc: vatsa@in.ibm.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@sw.ru, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, devel@openvz.org List-ID: Paul Menage wrote: > On 2/19/07, Balbir Singh wrote: >>> More worrisome is the potential for use-after-free. What prevents the >>> pointer at mm->container from referring to freed memory after we're dropped >>> the lock? >>> >> The container cannot be freed unless all tasks holding references to it are >> gone, > > ... or have been moved to other containers. If you're not holding > task->alloc_lock or one of the container mutexes, there's nothing to > stop the task being moved to another container, and the container > being deleted. > > If you're in an RCU section then you can guarantee that the container > (that you originally read from the task) and its subsystems at least > won't be deleted while you're accessing them, but for accounting like > this I suspect that's not enough, since you need to be adding to the > accounting stats on the correct container. I think you'll need to hold > mm->container_lock for the duration of memctl_update_rss() > > Paul > Yes, that sounds like the correct thing to do. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh -- 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: email@kvack.org