lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PREEMPT_RCU breaks anon_vma locking ?
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 12:23:03AM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> If my understanding correct, vmscan can find a page which lives in a already
> anon_vma_unlink'ed vma. This is ok, the page is pinned, and page->mapping is
> not cleared until free_hot_cold_page().
>
> So page_lock_anon_vma() works correctly due to SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU even if
> anon_vma_unlink() has already freed anon_vma. In that case we should see
> list_empty(&anon_vma->head), we are safe.
>
> However, we are doing spin_unlock(anon_vma->lock) after page_lock_anon_vma(),
> and this looks unsafe to me because page_lock_anon_vma() does rcu_read_unlock()
> on return.

This would indeed be bad when using CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU! Good catch!!!

> This worked before because spin_lock() implied rcu_read_lock(), so rcu was
> blocked if page_lock_anon_vma() returns !NULL. With CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU this
> is not true (yes?), so it is possible that the slab returns the memory to
> the system and it is re-used when we write to anon_vma->lock.
>
> IOW, don't we need something like this
>
> static struct anon_vma *page_lock_anon_vma(struct page *page)
> {
> struct anon_vma *anon_vma;
> unsigned long anon_mapping;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> anon_mapping = (unsigned long) page->mapping;
> if (!(anon_mapping & PAGE_MAPPING_ANON))
> goto out;
> if (!page_mapped(page))
> goto out;
>
> anon_vma = (struct anon_vma *) (anon_mapping - PAGE_MAPPING_ANON);
> spin_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
> return anon_vma;
>
> out:
> rcu_read_unlock();
> return NULL;
> }
>
> static inline void page_lock_anon_vma(struct anon_vma *anon_vma)
> {
> spin_unlock(&anon_vma->lock);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> ?

This look like a valid fix to me, at least as long as the lock is never
dropped in the meantime (e.g., to do I/O). If the lock -is- dropped in
the meantime, then presumably whatever is done to keep the page from
vanishing should allow an rcu_read_unlock() to be placed after each
spin_unlock(&...->lock) and an rcu_read_lock() to be placed before each
spin_lock(&...->lock).

Thanx, Paul
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-02-23 23:45    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans