From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: ego@in.ibm.com
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Freezer: Read PF_BORROWED_MM in a nonracy way
Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 12:41:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200705121241.55556.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070512101317.GB8860@in.ibm.com>
On Saturday, 12 May 2007 12:13, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 11:27:36AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, 12 May 2007 10:16, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> > >
> > > But I am not sure if this is the case with suspend/hibernate, since we
> > > need to do a sys_sync() between try_freeze_tasks(FREEZE_USER_SPACE) and
> > > try_to_freeze_tasks(FREEZE_KERNEL_THREADS).
> >
> > From the point of view of syncing it's only necessary to make sure that we
> > won't freeze a kernel thread that's needed for the syncing. We can have an
> > additional user space task running at this point.
>
> Ok. Say we're might have an additional user space task which is not
> frozen (say A).
>
> > >
> > > So should we perform that check in reparent_to_kthreadd() ?
> > > We are protected by the tasklist_lock there, no?
> >
> > Yes. Still, I think the daemonize()ed threads should clear their TIF_FREEZE
> > flag unconditionally right after they have called exit_mm(). So that would be
> > in daemonize().
> >
> > Or, perhaps, it's better to clear TIF_FREEZE (unconditionally) in exit_mm(),
> > after we've done tsk->mm = NULL? Oleg, what do you think?
> >
> Is the following scenario possible?
>
> FREEZE_KERNEL_THREADS:
> 1) Mark all leftover threads as freezeable. That would include 'A'.
> 2) 'A' is now daemonised and we clear TIF_FREEZE in exit_mm().
> 3) 'A' calls try_to_freeze() but doesn't enter the refrigerator.
>
> Hmm, on second thought, this shouldn't matter .
> The subsequent iteration will set A's TIF_FREEZE flag anyway, right?
> So I think it should be ok to unconditionally clear the TIF_FREEZE flag
> in exit_mm() after tsk->mm = NULL.
Yes.
Still, the following scenario is possible while we're freezing users space
tasks:
(1) user space task calls daemonize()
(2) freezer checks if this is a user space task and the test returns 'true'
(3) task calls exit_mm() and clears its TIF_FREEZE
(4) freezer sets TIF_FREEZE for the task
(5) task calls try_to_freeze() and freezes itself (bad!)
To prevent this from happening, I think, we should acquire task_lock() around
the entire block in which the test is made and TIF_FREEZE is set for the task,
so something more sophisticated than
freezer-read-pf_borrowed_mm-in-a-nonracy-way.patch is needed.
Well, I think we should ask Andrew to drop this patch and try to address the
issue in the next series of patches.
Greetings,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-12 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-10 22:35 [PATCH 0/7] Freezer bugfixes Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-10 22:36 ` [PATCH 1/7] Freezer: Read PF_BORROWED_MM in a nonracy way Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-11 19:39 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-11 20:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-11 20:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-11 22:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-11 23:20 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-11 23:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-11 23:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 0:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 0:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-12 0:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 1:01 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 1:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-12 9:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 10:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 14:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 16:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 17:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 17:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 1:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-11 23:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-11 23:25 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-12 0:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-11 23:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-12 0:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 8:16 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-12 9:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 10:13 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-12 10:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2007-05-12 10:52 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-12 11:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-12 14:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-12 14:59 ` migrate_dead_tasks() vs sleep-after-exit_notify() problems? Oleg Nesterov
2007-05-10 22:37 ` [PATCH 2/7] Freezer: Close potential race between refrigerator and thaw_tasks Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-10 22:38 ` [PATCH 3/7] Freezer: Fix vfork problem Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-10 22:39 ` [PATCH 4/7] Freezer: Take kernel_execve into consideration Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-10 22:41 ` [PATCH 5/7] Freezer: Fix kthread_create vs freezer theoretical race Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-10 22:43 ` [PATCH 6/7] Freezer: Fix PF_NOFREEZE vs freezeable race Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-05-10 22:44 ` [PATCH 7/7] Freezer: Move frozen_process to kernel/power/process.c Rafael J. Wysocki
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=200705121241.55556.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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