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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:17:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>, Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: slub/debugobjects: lockup when freeing memory On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:32:41PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:37:17PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:29:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > Well, no. Look at the callchain: > > > > > > > > > > > > __call_rcu > > > > > > debug_object_activate > > > > > > rcuhead_fixup_activate > > > > > > debug_object_init > > > > > > kmem_cache_alloc > > > > > > > > > > > > So call rcu activates the object, but the object has no reference in > > > > > > the debug objects code so the fixup code is called which inits the > > > > > > object and allocates a reference .... > > > > > > > > > > OK, got it. And you are right, call_rcu() has done this for a very > > > > > long time, so not sure what changed. But it seems like the right > > > > > approach is to provide a debug-object-free call_rcu_alloc() for use > > > > > by the memory allocators. > > > > > > > > > > Seem reasonable? If so, please see the following patch. > > > > > > > > Not really, you're torpedoing the whole purpose of debugobjects :) > > > > > > > > So, why can't we just init the rcu head when the stuff is created? > > > > > > That would allow me to keep my code unchanged, so I am in favor. ;-) > > > > Almost unchanged. You need to provide a function to do so, i.e. make > > use of > > > > debug_init_rcu_head() > > You mean like this? I'd rather name it init_rcu_head() and free_rcu_head() w/o the debug_ prefix, so it's consistent with init_rcu_head_on_stack / destroy_rcu_head_on_stack. But either way works for me. Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> -- 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