linux-kernel - Re: WARNING bisected (was Re: [PATCH v7 08/10] mm: rework non-root kmem

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <e2923bb7-19bf-b303-9457-49040acffe92@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Nov 2019 09:00:56 +0100
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc:     "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "hannes@...xchg.org" <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "longman@...hat.com" <longman@...hat.com>,
        "shakeelb@...gle.com" <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        "vdavydov.dev@...il.com" <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: WARNING bisected (was Re: [PATCH v7 08/10] mm: rework non-root
 kmem_cache lifecycle management)



On 24.11.19 01:39, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 05:28:46PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> On 21.11.19 19:45, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>>> I see. Do you know, which kmem_cache it is? If not, can you, please,
>>> figure it out?
>>
>> The release function for that ref is kmemcg_cache_shutdown. 
>>
> 
> Hi Christian!
> 
> Can you, please, test if the following patch resolves the problem?

Yes, it does.


> 
> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> index 8afa188f6e20..628e5f0ee19e 100644
> --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> @@ -888,6 +888,8 @@ static int shutdown_memcg_caches(struct kmem_cache *s)
>  
>  static void flush_memcg_workqueue(struct kmem_cache *s)
>  {
> +	bool wait_for_children;
> +
>  	spin_lock_irq(&memcg_kmem_wq_lock);
>  	s->memcg_params.dying = true;
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&memcg_kmem_wq_lock);
> @@ -904,6 +906,13 @@ static void flush_memcg_workqueue(struct kmem_cache *s)
>  	 * previous workitems on workqueue are processed.
>  	 */
>  	flush_workqueue(memcg_kmem_cache_wq);
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&slab_mutex);
> +	wait_for_children = !list_empty(&s->memcg_params.children);
> +	mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);

Not sure if (for reading) we really need the mutex. 
> +
> +	if (wait_for_children)
> +		rcu_barrier();
>  }
>  #else
>  static inline int shutdown_memcg_caches(struct kmem_cache *s)
> 
> --
> 
> Thanks!
>