[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080414161428.27f3ee59.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:14:28 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: fix oops in oom handling
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:52:00 +0800
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> It's reproducable in a x86_64 box, but doesn't happen in x86_32.
>
> This is because tsk->sighand is not guarded by RCU, so we have to
> hold tasklist_lock, just as what out_of_memory() does.
>
Good catch! and patch seems good.
Paul, I have one confirmation. Lock hierarchy of
cgroup_lock()
-> read_lock(&tasklist_lock)
is ok ? (I think this is ok.)
Thanks,
-Kame
> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu>
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index f255eda..beb592f 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -423,7 +423,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *mem, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> struct task_struct *p;
>
> cgroup_lock();
> - rcu_read_lock();
> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> retry:
> p = select_bad_process(&points, mem);
> if (PTR_ERR(p) == -1UL)
> @@ -436,7 +436,7 @@ retry:
> "Memory cgroup out of memory"))
> goto retry;
> out:
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> + read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> cgroup_unlock();
> }
> #endif
> -- 1.5.4.rc3
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists