[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1270629439.5109.553.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:37:19 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Ugly rmap NULL ptr deref oopsie on hibernate (was Linux
2.6.34-rc3)
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 08:55 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I do wonder if "page_lock_anon_vma()" should check the whole
> "page_mapped()" case _after_ taking the anon_vma lock. Because if the race
> happens, we're following a anon_vma list that has nothing to do with that
> page (it's stilla _valid_ list, since we locked the anon_vma, but will it
> be ok?)
>
> IOW, what is it that really keeps the anon_vma list reliable _and_
> relevant wrt the page? We know we may get a stale anon_vma, are we ok if
> that anon_vma list doesn't actually have anything to do with the page any
> more?
When doing the whole make i_mmap_lock/anon_vma->lock a mutex thing last
week I ran into the same issue and its on my todo list to find out wth
is happening there.
So yes I think we should move that validation check inside
page_lock_anon_vma().
I'll cook up a patch once I'm done staring at the various funny arch
mmu_gather implementations.
--
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