[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110525085816.GA24233@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 10:58:16 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "slub: Remove node check in slab_free"
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org> wrote:
>
> > I started experiencing a boot hang in 2.6.39+, and bisected it to this
> > change:
>
> i too was seeing various instabilities and SLUB corruption in -tip testing.
> Every 5th randconfig kernel crashes.
>
> I started testing the revert.
Stability of -tip has increased dramatically (36 test iterations and
no crash), so yes this revert resolves the crashes.
I've attached the changelogified revert patch below. James, since i
was seeing these sporadically you've saved me a couple of hours of
rather painful bisection work! :-)
Thanks,
Ingo
----------------->
>From 6ac0730862b6dd1b45bc86e8e61e4026293b09f9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 09:37:47 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "slub: Remove node check in slab_free"
This reverts commit 442b06bcea23a01934d3da7ec5898fa154a6cafb.
As Linus explained it's broken. Quoting Linus:
That whole "deactivate_slab()" + "c->page = NULL" that this patch
does looks bogus.
Look at __slab_alloc(), we have:
page = c->page;
if (!page)
goto new_slab;
slab_lock(page);
if (unlikely(!node_match(c, node)))
goto another_slab;
and let's assume we have two users racing on that "c->page". The
"slab_lock()" is going to work for one of them, right?
Ok, so the one it works for will then hit:
if (kmem_cache_debug(s))
goto debug;
and thus get to the new "deactivate_slab(s,c) + c->page = NULL" and
then unlock the page.
In the meantime, the one that wasn't able to lock the page will now
go forward, but will not have "node_match()" any more, so it does
that "goto another_slab".
Which does "deactivate_slab(s,c)" again, and now c->page is NULL, so
that totally breaks.
Reported-and-bisected-by: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Analyzed-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Acked-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.LRH.2.00.1105242146240.12134@tundra.namei.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
---
mm/slub.c | 4 +---
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
index 4ea7f1a..ed1281b 100644
--- a/mm/slub.c
+++ b/mm/slub.c
@@ -1881,8 +1881,6 @@ debug:
page->inuse++;
page->freelist = get_freepointer(s, object);
- deactivate_slab(s, c);
- c->page = NULL;
c->node = NUMA_NO_NODE;
goto unlock_out;
}
@@ -2114,7 +2112,7 @@ redo:
tid = c->tid;
barrier();
- if (likely(page == c->page)) {
+ if (likely(page == c->page && c->node != NUMA_NO_NODE)) {
set_freepointer(s, object, c->freelist);
if (unlikely(!irqsafe_cpu_cmpxchg_double(
--
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