[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyPq+vVyFJ9GGm8FxH-MYAzLA+Q86Gmz44aDopQxrsC9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 16:25:46 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "# .39.x" <stable@...nel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix list corruptions on shmem shrinklist
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Where is this INIT_LIST_HEAD()?
I think it's this one:
list_del_init(&info->shrinklist);
in shmem_unused_huge_shrink().
> I'm not sure I'm understanding this. AFAICT all the list operations to
> which you refer are synchronized under spin_lock(&sbinfo->shrinklist_lock)?
No, notice how shmem_unused_huge_shrink() does the
list_move(&info->shrinklist, &to_remove);
and
list_move(&info->shrinklist, &list);
to move to (two different) private lists under the shrinklist_lock,
but once it is on that private "list/to_remove" list, it is then
accessed outside the locked region.
Honestly, I don't love this situation, or the patch, but I think the
patch is likely the right thing to do.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists