Messages in this thread Patch in this message |  | | | Date | Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:23:53 -0800 | | From | Greg KH <> | | Subject | [134/152] memcg: fix wrong VM_BUG_ON() in try_charge()s mm->owner check |
| |
2.6.36-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
------------------ From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
commit ebb76ce16daf6908dc030dec1c00827d37129fe5 upstream.
At __mem_cgroup_try_charge(), VM_BUG_ON(!mm->owner) is checked. But as commented in mem_cgroup_from_task(), mm->owner can be NULL in some racy case. This check of VM_BUG_ON() is bad.
A possible story to hit this is at swapoff()->try_to_unuse(). It passes mm_struct to mem_cgroup_try_charge_swapin() while mm->owner is NULL. If we can't get proper mem_cgroup from swap_cgroup information, mm->owner is used as charge target and we see NULL.
Cc: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Reported-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Reported-by: Thomas Meyer <thomas@m3y3r.de> Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Reviewed-by: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
--- mm/memcontrol.c | 19 +++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) --- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c @@ -1730,19 +1730,18 @@ again: rcu_read_lock(); p = rcu_dereference(mm->owner); - VM_BUG_ON(!p); /* - * because we don't have task_lock(), "p" can exit while - * we're here. In that case, "mem" can point to root - * cgroup but never be NULL. (and task_struct itself is freed - * by RCU, cgroup itself is RCU safe.) Then, we have small - * risk here to get wrong cgroup. But such kind of mis-account - * by race always happens because we don't have cgroup_mutex(). - * It's overkill and we allow that small race, here. + * Because we don't have task_lock(), "p" can exit. + * In that case, "mem" can point to root or p can be NULL with + * race with swapoff. Then, we have small risk of mis-accouning. + * But such kind of mis-account by race always happens because + * we don't have cgroup_mutex(). It's overkill and we allo that + * small race, here. + * (*) swapoff at el will charge against mm-struct not against + * task-struct. So, mm->owner can be NULL. */ mem = mem_cgroup_from_task(p); - VM_BUG_ON(!mem); - if (mem_cgroup_is_root(mem)) { + if (!mem || mem_cgroup_is_root(mem)) { rcu_read_unlock(); goto done; }
|  |