[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50118D16.4050603@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:31:50 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
CC: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -alternative] mm: hugetlbfs: Close race during teardown
of hugetlbfs shared page tables V2 (resend)
On 07/20/2012 10:36 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> @@ -81,7 +81,12 @@ static void huge_pmd_share(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, pud_t *pud)
> if (saddr) {
> spte = huge_pte_offset(svma->vm_mm, saddr);
> if (spte) {
> - get_page(virt_to_page(spte));
> + struct page *spte_page = virt_to_page(spte);
> + if (!is_hugetlb_pmd_page_valid(spte_page)) {
What prevents somebody else from marking the hugetlb
pmd invalid, between here...
> + spte = NULL;
> + continue;
> + }
... and here?
> + get_page(spte_page);
> break;
> }
I think need to take the refcount before checking whether
the hugetlb pmd is still valid.
Also, disregard my previous email in this thread, I just
read Mel's detailed explanation and wrapped my brain
around the bug :)
--
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