lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: A regression in recent 3.2 kernel: bdi_dirty_limit() divide error
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 11:19:14AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-01-08 at 10:33 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 05:35:25PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2012-01-07 at 22:56 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > > Subject:
> > > > Date: Sat Jan 07 22:50:45 CST 2012
> > > >
> > > > The uninitilized shift may lead to denominator=0 in
> > > > prop_fraction_percpu() and divide error in bdi_dirty_limit().
> > >
> > > I'm not seeing how, only proc_change_shift() can change ->index, and it
> > > does that after it writes ->pg[index]->shift.
> >
> > Then I lose the clue why bdi_dirty_limit() will divide error at all.
>
> You and me both, the weird thing is, this code hasn't been changes like
> forever and I can't recall any such weirdness.
>
> In fact, prop_fraction_percpu() sets the denominator to period_2 +
> (global_count & counter_mask).
>
> The only way to make that 0 is to overflow the unsigned long.. did the
> crash happen on 32bit -- I never saw the initial report?

No, it's a 64bit kernel. Sorry I should have forwarded the initial
complete report.

> But even then, we limit PROP_MAX_SHIFT to 3*BITS_PER_LONG/4, I don't
> think that could ever overflow.

It seems PROP_MAX_SHIFT should be set to <=32 on 64bit box, because

1) bdi_dirty_limit() only uses the lower 32 bit of the denominator
by calling do_div()

2) (bdi_dirty * numerator) could easily overflow if numerator used
up to 48 bits, leaving only 16 bits to bdi_dirty

And I guess (2) may be the root cause of a related old bug:

sudden drops of bdi_thresh
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1109.0/00183.html
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1109.0/00183/10-3.1.0-rc1%2Bbalance_dirty_pages-pages.png

> > prop_change_shift() does
> >
> > change ->pg[index]->shift
> > smp_wmb()
> > change ->index
> >
> > Will the read side prop_fraction_percpu() need some read memory barrier?
>
> It actually has one, see prop_get_global()...

Ah yes! Sorry for overlooking this.

Regards,
Fengguang


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-09 05:57    [W:0.048 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site