[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1394568453.2786.28.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:07:33 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
To: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: mm: mmap_sem lock assertion failure in __mlock_vma_pages_range
On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 15:39 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've ended up deleting the log file by mistake, but this bug does seem to be important
> so I'd rather not wait before the same issue is triggered again.
>
> The call chain is:
>
> mlock (mm/mlock.c:745)
> __mm_populate (mm/mlock.c:700)
> __mlock_vma_pages_range (mm/mlock.c:229)
> VM_BUG_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&mm->mmap_sem));
So __mm_populate() is only called by mlock(2) and this VM_BUG_ON seems
wrong as we call it without the lock held:
up_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
if (!error)
error = __mm_populate(start, len, 0);
return error;
}
>
> It seems to be a rather simple trace triggered from userspace. The only recent patch
> in the area (that I've noticed) was "mm/mlock: prepare params outside critical region".
> I've reverted it and trying to testing without it.
Odd, this patch should definitely *not* cause this. In any case every
operation removed from the critical region is local to the function:
lock_limit = rlimit(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK);
lock_limit >>= PAGE_SHIFT;
locked = len >> PAGE_SHIFT;
down_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
--
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