Re: [PATCH] madvise: fix locking in force_swapin_readahead() (Re: [PATCH 08/11] madvise: redefine callback functions for page table walker)

[Hugh Dickins]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2014, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 09:47:04PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On 02/10/2014 04:44 PM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > >swapin_walk_pmd_entry() is defined as pmd_entry(), but it has no code
> > >about pmd handling (except pmd_none_or_trans_huge_or_clear_bad, but the
> > >same check are now done in core page table walk code).
> > >So let's move this function on pte_entry() as swapin_walk_pte_entry().
> > >
> > >Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi<n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > This patch seems to generate:
> 
> Sasha, thank you for reporting.
> I forgot to unlock ptlock before entering read_swap_cache_async() which
> holds page lock in it, as a result lock ordering rule (written in mm/rmap.c)
> was violated (we should take in the order of mmap_sem -> page lock -> ptlock.)
> The following patch should fix this. Could you test with it?
> 
> ---
> From c0d56af5874dc40467c9b3a0f9e53b39b3c4f1c5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 22:30:51 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] madvise: fix locking in force_swapin_readahead()
> 
> We take mmap_sem and ptlock in walking over ptes with swapin_walk_pte_entry(),
> but inside it we call read_swap_cache_async() which holds page lock.
> So we should unlock ptlock to call read_swap_cache_async() to meet lock order
> rule (mmap_sem -> page lock -> ptlock).
> 
> Reported-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

NAK.  You are now unlocking and relocking the spinlock, good; but on
arm frv or i386 CONFIG_HIGHPTE you are leaving the page table atomically
kmapped across read_swap_cache_async(), which (never mind lock ordering)
is quite likely to block waiting to allocate memory.

I do not see
madvise-redefine-callback-functions-for-page-table-walker.patch
as an improvement.  I can see what's going on in Shaohua's original
code, whereas this style makes bugs more likely.  Please drop it.

Hugh

> ---
>  mm/madvise.c | 11 +++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/madvise.c b/mm/madvise.c
> index 5e957b984c14..ed9c31e3b5ff 100644
> --- a/mm/madvise.c
> +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> @@ -141,24 +141,35 @@ static int swapin_walk_pte_entry(pte_t *pte, unsigned long start,
>  	swp_entry_t entry;
>  	struct page *page;
>  	struct vm_area_struct *vma = walk->vma;
> +	spinlock_t *ptl = (spinlock_t *)walk->private;
>  
>  	if (pte_present(*pte) || pte_none(*pte) || pte_file(*pte))
>  		return 0;
>  	entry = pte_to_swp_entry(*pte);
>  	if (unlikely(non_swap_entry(entry)))
>  		return 0;
> +	spin_unlock(ptl);
>  	page = read_swap_cache_async(entry, GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE,
>  				     vma, start);
> +	spin_lock(ptl);
>  	if (page)
>  		page_cache_release(page);
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static int swapin_walk_pmd_entry(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long start,
> +	unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk)
> +{
> +	walk->private = pte_lockptr(walk->mm, pmd);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static void force_swapin_readahead(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  		unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
>  {
>  	struct mm_walk walk = {
>  		.mm = vma->vm_mm,
> +		.pmd_entry = swapin_walk_pmd_entry,
>  		.pte_entry = swapin_walk_pte_entry,
>  	};
>  
> -- 
> 1.8.5.3
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/