Messages in this thread | | | From | Dave Peterson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: fix mm_struct reference counting bugs in mm/oom_kill.c | Date | Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:44:02 -0700 |
| |
On Thursday 13 April 2006 16:24, Andrew Morton wrote: > Dave Peterson <dsp@llnl.gov> wrote: > > The patch below fixes some mm_struct reference counting bugs in > > badness(). > > hm, OK, afaict the code _is_ racy. > > But you're now calling mmput() inside read_lock(&tasklist_lock), and > mmput() can sleep in exit_aio() or in exit_mmap()->unmap_vmas(). So > sterner stuff will be needed. > > I'll put a might_sleep() into mmput - it's a bit unexpected.
Hmm... fixing this looks rather tricky. If get_task_mm()/mmput() was only being done on a single mm_struct then I suppose badness() could do something a bit ugly like passing the reference back to its caller and letting the caller do the mmput() once tasklist_lock is no longer held. However here we are iterating over a bunch of child tasks, potentially doing a get_task_mm()/mmput() for a number of them.
I have a suggestion for a possible solution. Currently mmput() is implemented as follows:
01 void mmput(struct mm_struct *mm) 02 { 03 if (atomic_dec_and_lock(&mm->mm_users, &mmlist_lock)) { 04 list_del(&mm->mmlist); 05 mmlist_nr--; 06 spin_unlock(&mmlist_lock); 07 exit_aio(mm); 08 exit_mmap(mm); 09 put_swap_token(mm); 10 mmdrop(mm); 11 } 12 }
Suppose we replace lines 07-10 with a little piece of code that adds the mm_struct to a list. Then a kernel thread empties the list (perhaps via the work queue mechanism), doing the stuff in lines 07-10 for each mm_struct. This would eliminate the possibility of mmput() sleeping, potentially making things easier for other callers of mmput() and causing fewer surprises. Any comments? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |