On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 09:03:14 -0700 (PDT), kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com
(Kanoj Sarcar) said:
> I suspect the problem is that shm_swap bumps up swap_id to more
> than max_shmid under some circumstances, leading the next call
> to shm_swap to trip. Note that valid values of max_shmid are 0 ..
> SHMMNI - 1, but shm_swap can leave swap_id set to SHMMNI.
> MMU code maintainers, could you please review the patch and let
> me know whether it is good
Agreed: the patch looks correct.
In particular, with the patch in place we are still protected against
having max_shmid shrink between calls to shm_swap(): the worst that can
happen is that we find an unused shm_seg which will get caught by the
IPC_UNUSED test near the top of shm_swap. Only if the shm table is
full, and so the swap_id overflow forces the next shm_segs[swap_id] to
point to an entry not preinitialised to IPC_UNUSED or IPC_NOID, will
there be a danger, and the patch makes sure that we never overstep that
bound. (This probably explains why we haven't seen the problem before:
were you allocating the maximum number of shm segments during the stress
test?)
--Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com (Kanoj Sarcar)
Sender: owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
To: Linux-MM@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: RFC: patch for suspected shm swap problem
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 09:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
Hi,
While running some heavy stress on shm code, I took a panic in
shm_swap coming out of do_try_to_free_pages in the context of
non-kswapd processes. From the register display, I suspect the
problem to be fixed by this patch:
--- /usr/tmp/p_rdiff_a000PE/shm.c Tue Apr 20 16:07:02 1999
+++ kern/ipc/shm.c Tue Apr 20 16:05:54 1999
@@ -716,10 +716,10 @@
next_id:
swap_idx = 0;
if (++swap_id > max_shmid) {
+ swap_id = 0;
if (loop)
goto failed;
loop = 1;
- swap_id = 0;
}
goto check_id;
}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/