linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] SHM_UNLOCK: fix Unevictable pages stranded after swap

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1201091546450.1778@eggly.anvils>
Date:	Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:56:36 -0800 (PST)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] SHM_UNLOCK: fix Unevictable pages stranded after
 swap

On Mon, 9 Jan 2012, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> (1/9/12 5:25 PM), Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Jan 2012, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > 
> > > PG_mlocked operation is not protected by LRU lock. So, I think we
> > 
> > Right.  But I don't see that I've made a significant change there.
> > 
> > I may be being lazy, and rushing back to answer you, without giving
> > constructive thought to what the precise race is that you see, and
> > how we might fix it.  If the case you have in mind is easy for you
> > to describe in detail, please do so; but don't hesitate to tell me
> > to my own work for myself!
> 
> Bah! I was moron. I now think your code is right.
> 
> spin_lock(lru_lock)
> if (page_evictable(page))
> 	blah blah blah
> spin_unlock(lru_lock)
> 
> is always safe. Counter part should have following code and
> waiting spin_lock(lru_lock) in isolate_lru_page().
> 
>                 if (!isolate_lru_page(page))
>                         putback_lru_page(page);
> 
> then, even if check_move_unevictable_pages() observed wrong page status,
> putback_lru_page() should put back the page into right lru.
> 
> I'm very sorry for annoying you.

Far from it, thank you again for giving it serious thought.

I am not going to pretend to have thought down these paths myself,
not recently - I was just relying on not changing the behaviour.
But I am reassured to know that you have worked through it again
and are now satisfied.

> 
> 	Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>

Thank you.

> 
> Probably, page_evictable() might be needed some additional comments. But
> I have no idea what comment clearly explain this complex rule.....

I don't know any language that can make it clear: when forced to,
one just has to think through it back and forth by oneself; and
even then, it's so quickly forgotten.

Hugh
--
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/