linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v20 08/20] mm: page_idle_get_page() does not need lru

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20201105153649.GC744831@cmpxchg.org>
Date:   Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:36:49 -0500
From:   Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:     Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, tj@...nel.org, hughd@...gle.com,
        khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru, daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com,
        lkp@...el.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, richard.weiyang@...il.com,
        kirill@...temov.name, alexander.duyck@...il.com,
        rong.a.chen@...el.com, mhocko@...e.com, vdavydov.dev@...il.com,
        shy828301@...il.com, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 08/20] mm: page_idle_get_page() does not need lru_lock

On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 01:03:18PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> 
> 
> 在 2020/11/5 下午12:57, Matthew Wilcox 写道:
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:52:05PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> >> @@ -1054,8 +1054,27 @@ static void __page_set_anon_rmap(struct page *page,
> >>  	if (!exclusive)
> >>  		anon_vma = anon_vma->root;
> >>  
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * w/o the WRITE_ONCE here the following scenario may happens due to
> >> +	 * store reordering.
> >> +	 *
> >> +	 *      CPU 0                                          CPU 1
> >> +	 *
> >> +	 * do_anonymous_page				page_idle_clear_pte_refs
> >> +	 *   __page_set_anon_rmap
> >> +	 *     page->mapping = anon_vma + PAGE_MAPPING_ANON
> >> +	 *   lru_cache_add_inactive_or_unevictable()
> >> +	 *     SetPageLRU(page)
> >> +	 *                                               rmap_walk
> >> +	 *                                                if PageAnon(page)
> >> +	 *
> >> +	 *  The 'SetPageLRU' may reordered before page->mapping setting, and
> >> +	 *  page->mapping may set with anon_vma, w/o anon bit, then rmap_walk
> >> +	 *  may goes to rmap_walk_file() for a anon page.
> >> +	 */
> >> +
> >>  	anon_vma = (void *) anon_vma + PAGE_MAPPING_ANON;
> >> -	page->mapping = (struct address_space *) anon_vma;
> >> +	WRITE_ONCE(page->mapping, (struct address_space *) anon_vma);
> >>  	page->index = linear_page_index(vma, address);
> >>  }
> > 
> > I don't like these verbose comments with detailed descriptions in
> > the source code.  They're fine in changelogs, but they clutter the
> > code, and they get outdated really quickly.  My preference is for
> > something more brief:
> > 
> > 	/*
> > 	 * Prevent page->mapping from pointing to an anon_vma without
> > 	 * the PAGE_MAPPING_ANON bit set.  This could happen if the
> > 	 * compiler stores anon_vma and then adds PAGE_MAPPING_ANON to it.
> > 	 */
> > 

Yeah, I don't think this scenario warrants the full race diagram in
the code itself.

But the code is highly specific - synchronizing one struct page member
for one particular use case. Let's keep at least a reference to what
we are synchronizing against. There is a non-zero chance that if the
comment goes out of date, so does the code. How about this?

	/*
	 * page_idle does a lockless/optimistic rmap scan on page->mapping.
	 * Make sure the compiler doesn't split the stores of anon_vma and
	 * the PAGE_MAPPING_ANON type identifier, otherwise the rmap code
	 * could mistake the mapping for a struct address_space and crash.
	 */