[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210506173757.586580bd@alex-virtual-machine>
Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 17:37:57 +0800
From: Aili Yao <yaoaili@...gsoft.com>
To: Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@...il.com>
CC: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
"David Hildenbrand" <david@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...nel.org>,
Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>,
Jue Wang <juew@...gle.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<yaoaili126@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mm/memory-failure: Use a mutex to avoid
memory_failure() races
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 15:29:52 +0900
Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@...il.com> wrote:
> From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
>
> There can be races when multiple CPUs consume poison from the same
> page. The first into memory_failure() atomically sets the HWPoison
> page flag and begins hunting for tasks that map this page. Eventually
> it invalidates those mappings and may send a SIGBUS to the affected
> tasks.
>
> But while all that work is going on, other CPUs see a "success"
> return code from memory_failure() and so they believe the error
> has been handled and continue executing.
>
> Fix by wrapping most of the internal parts of memory_failure() in
> a mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>
> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Sorry to interrupt, I just thought one thing:
This mutex seems not been bind to the error page, will there be some core case
like test code or multi-poison case whick will break this mutex?
Thanks!
Aili Yao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists