From: James Washer <washer@us.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: switch_mm() can fail to load ldt on SMP
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:41:04 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200107242241.PAA05423@crg8.sequent.com> (raw)
We've run into a small bug in switch_mm() which results in a process
running with a 'stale' ldt.
The following timeline explains how the bug can occur
Process A begins its life on cpu 0.
Process A is context switched OFF of cpu 0 and replaced by
the idle task (perhaps because of a slow system call).
Process A next runs on cpu 1, where it calls modify_ldt,
to establish an ldt
Process A is context switched OFF of cpu 1
Process A is selected to run on cpu 0.
If cpu 0 has been continually running the idle task, then when
switch_mm() compares the next and prev mm_struct pointers, it will
find they are equal and NOT call load_LDT().
Process A will begin running, with the ldt pointing at default_ldt rather
than its private ldt ( mm->context.segments ).
We have two possible fixes for this problem, and welcome comments as to
which would be 'best'.
The first fix would be to patch switch_mm(), so that when the next and
prev mm pointers are equal, it checks to see if mm->context.segments
is non-null, if so, it calls load_LDT(). This will unfortunately lead
to many unnecessary calls to load_LDT(). An enhanced version of this
fix, would involve introducing a bit array into the mm_struct, one
bit per cpu. When write_ldt() first allocates the ldt for this mm_struct,
it would set all bits. Subsequently, in switch_mm(), we could
introduce a test such as
if(next->context.segments &&
test_and_clear_bit(cpu,&next->ldtupdate))load_LDT(next);
so that as each engine switchs to this mm_struct, a load_LDT() is
guaranteed.
The second fix would introduce yet another IPI. When write_ldt() first
creates a new ldt, it would send an IPI to all other cpu's, passing the
mm pointer as an arg. If the other cpu's were using the mm, they would
then call load_LDT().
Which fix is better depends on the system and application. On a system
with hundreds of processes sharing the same mm_struct, the first fix
will result in quite a few calls to load_LDT(). On a system with a large
number of cpus, and short lived programs using segments, the IPI will
be wasteful.
Please respond with comments as to which patch seems best to you, or
alternative patches if you have suggestions.
thanks
Judy Barkal and Jim Washer
jbarkal@us.ibm.com washer@us.ibm.com
p.s. This problem presented itself in a small application linked to
libpthread (for those that don't know, some versions of libpthread use
segmentation on i386 platforms). Occasionally, the application would
die from a SIGSEGV.
Investigation found that it was dying when the kernel attempted to
restore the gs register. Further investigation showed that the ldt
entry in the gdt pointed to the default_ldt, leading to the
segmentation violation.
next reply other threads:[~2001-07-24 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-24 22:41 James Washer [this message]
2001-07-25 0:37 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200107242241.PAA05423@crg8.sequent.com \
--to=washer@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®