[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170225210019.23610-1-tahsin@google.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 13:00:19 -0800
From: Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@...gle.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Roman Pen <r.peniaev@...il.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, zijun_hu <zijun_hu@....com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] percpu: acquire pcpu_lock when updating pcpu_nr_empty_pop_pages
Update to pcpu_nr_empty_pop_pages in pcpu_alloc() is currently done
without holding pcpu_lock. This can lead to bad updates to the variable.
Add missing lock calls.
Fixes: b539b87fed37 ("percpu: implmeent pcpu_nr_empty_pop_pages and chunk->nr_populated")
Signed-off-by: Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@...gle.com>
---
mm/percpu.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/percpu.c b/mm/percpu.c
index 0686f566d347..232356a2d914 100644
--- a/mm/percpu.c
+++ b/mm/percpu.c
@@ -1011,8 +1011,11 @@ static void __percpu *pcpu_alloc(size_t size, size_t align, bool reserved,
mutex_unlock(&pcpu_alloc_mutex);
}
- if (chunk != pcpu_reserved_chunk)
+ if (chunk != pcpu_reserved_chunk) {
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&pcpu_lock, flags);
pcpu_nr_empty_pop_pages -= occ_pages;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pcpu_lock, flags);
+ }
if (pcpu_nr_empty_pop_pages < PCPU_EMPTY_POP_PAGES_LOW)
pcpu_schedule_balance_work();
--
2.11.0.483.g087da7b7c-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists