[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150616230414.GA15776@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 01:04:14 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-aio@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] aio: ctx->dead cleanups
Al, please help. We are trying to backport some aio fixes and I am
absolutely confused by your b2edffdd912b "fix mremap() vs. ioctx_kill()
race".
Firstly, I simply can't understand what exactly it tries to fix. OK,
aio_free_ring() can race with kill and we can remap the soon-to-be-killed
ctx. So what? kill_ioctx() will the the correct (already re-mapped)
ctx->mmap_base after it drops mm->ioctx_lock.
So it seems to me we only need this change to ensure that move_vma() can
not succeed if ctx was already removed from ->ioctx_table, or, if we race
with ioctx_alloc(), it was not added to ->ioctx_table. IOW, we need to
ensure that move_vma()->aio_ring_mmap() can not race with
vm_munmap(ctx->mmap_base) in kill_ioctx() or ioctx_alloc(). And this race
doesn't look really bad. The kernel can't crash, just the application can
fool itself.
But I guess I missed something, and I'd like to know what I have missed.
Could you explain?
Also. The change in move_vma() looks "obviously wrong". Don't we need
something like the patch at the end to ensure we do not "leak" new_vma
or I am totally confused?
But to me the main problem is atomic_read(ctx->dead) in aio_remap().
I mean, it complicates the backporting, and it looks unnecessary and
confusing. See the 1st patch.
Please review, I do not know how to test this.
Oleg.
--- x/mm/mremap.c
+++ x/mm/mremap.c
@@ -275,6 +275,8 @@ static unsigned long move_vma(struct vm_
moved_len = move_page_tables(vma, old_addr, new_vma, new_addr, old_len,
need_rmap_locks);
if (moved_len < old_len) {
+ err = -ENOMEM;
+xxx:
/*
* On error, move entries back from new area to old,
* which will succeed since page tables still there,
@@ -285,14 +287,11 @@ static unsigned long move_vma(struct vm_
vma = new_vma;
old_len = new_len;
old_addr = new_addr;
- new_addr = -ENOMEM;
+ new_addr = err;
} else if (vma->vm_file && vma->vm_file->f_op->mremap) {
err = vma->vm_file->f_op->mremap(vma->vm_file, new_vma);
- if (err < 0) {
- move_page_tables(new_vma, new_addr, vma, old_addr,
- moved_len, true);
- return err;
- }
+ if (err < 0)
+ goto xxx;
}
/* Conceal VM_ACCOUNT so old reservation is not undone */
--
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