* [PATCH 3/8] mm/swap: prevent concurrent swapon on the same S_ISBLK blockdev
@ 2014-01-27 10:03 Weijie Yang
2014-02-03 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Weijie Yang @ 2014-01-27 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hughd
Cc: 'Andrew Morton', 'Minchan Kim', shli,
'Bob Liu', weijie.yang.kh, 'Seth Jennings',
'Heesub Shin', mquzik, 'Linux-MM',
'linux-kernel', stable
When swapon the same S_ISBLK blockdev concurrent, the allocated two
swap_info could hold the same block_device, because claim_swapfile()
allow the same holder(here, it is sys_swapon function).
To prevent this situation, This patch adds swap_lock protect to ensure
we can find this situation and return -EBUSY for one swapon call.
As for S_ISREG swapfile, claim_swapfile() already prevent this scenario
by holding inode->i_mutex.
This patch is just for a rare scenario, aim to correct of code.
Signed-off-by: Weijie Yang <weijie.yang@samsung.com>
---
mm/swapfile.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/swapfile.c b/mm/swapfile.c
index 4d24158..413c213 100644
--- a/mm/swapfile.c
+++ b/mm/swapfile.c
@@ -2459,9 +2459,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(swapon, const char __user *, specialfile, int, swap_flags)
goto bad_swap;
}
+ /* prevent concurrent swapon on the same S_ISBLK blockdev */
+ spin_lock(&swap_lock);
p->swap_file = swap_file;
mapping = swap_file->f_mapping;
-
for (i = 0; i < nr_swapfiles; i++) {
struct swap_info_struct *q = swap_info[i];
@@ -2472,6 +2473,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(swapon, const char __user *, specialfile, int, swap_flags)
goto bad_swap;
}
}
+ spin_unlock(&swap_lock);
inode = mapping->host;
/* If S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) will do mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex); */
--
1.7.10.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 3/8] mm/swap: prevent concurrent swapon on the same S_ISBLK blockdev
2014-01-27 10:03 [PATCH 3/8] mm/swap: prevent concurrent swapon on the same S_ISBLK blockdev Weijie Yang
@ 2014-02-03 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-04 4:20 ` Hugh Dickins
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2014-02-03 23:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Weijie Yang
Cc: hughd, 'Minchan Kim', shli, 'Bob Liu',
weijie.yang.kh, 'Seth Jennings', 'Heesub Shin',
mquzik, 'Linux-MM', 'linux-kernel', stable
On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 18:03:04 +0800 Weijie Yang <weijie.yang@samsung.com> wrote:
> When swapon the same S_ISBLK blockdev concurrent, the allocated two
> swap_info could hold the same block_device, because claim_swapfile()
> allow the same holder(here, it is sys_swapon function).
>
> To prevent this situation, This patch adds swap_lock protect to ensure
> we can find this situation and return -EBUSY for one swapon call.
>
> As for S_ISREG swapfile, claim_swapfile() already prevent this scenario
> by holding inode->i_mutex.
>
> This patch is just for a rare scenario, aim to correct of code.
>
hm, OK. Would it be saner to pass a unique `holder' to
claim_swapfile()? Say, `p'?
Truly, I am fed up with silly swapon/swapoff races. How often does
anyone call these things? Let's slap a huge lock around the whole
thing and be done with it?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/8] mm/swap: prevent concurrent swapon on the same S_ISBLK blockdev
2014-02-03 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2014-02-04 4:20 ` Hugh Dickins
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Hugh Dickins @ 2014-02-04 4:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Weijie Yang, hughd, Minchan Kim, shli, Bob Liu, weijie.yang.kh,
Seth Jennings, Heesub Shin, mquzik, Linux-MM, linux-kernel,
stable
On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 18:03:04 +0800 Weijie Yang <weijie.yang@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> > When swapon the same S_ISBLK blockdev concurrent, the allocated two
> > swap_info could hold the same block_device, because claim_swapfile()
> > allow the same holder(here, it is sys_swapon function).
> >
> > To prevent this situation, This patch adds swap_lock protect to ensure
> > we can find this situation and return -EBUSY for one swapon call.
> >
> > As for S_ISREG swapfile, claim_swapfile() already prevent this scenario
> > by holding inode->i_mutex.
> >
> > This patch is just for a rare scenario, aim to correct of code.
> >
>
> hm, OK. Would it be saner to pass a unique `holder' to
> claim_swapfile()? Say, `p'?
>
> Truly, I am fed up with silly swapon/swapoff races. How often does
> anyone call these things? Let's slap a huge lock around the whole
> thing and be done with it?
That answer makes me sad: we can't be bothered to get it right,
even when Weijie goes to the trouble of presenting a series to do so.
But I sure don't deserve a vote until I've actually looked through it.
Hugh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-02-04 4:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-01-27 10:03 [PATCH 3/8] mm/swap: prevent concurrent swapon on the same S_ISBLK blockdev Weijie Yang
2014-02-03 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-04 4:20 ` Hugh Dickins
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox