From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
anton@samba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exec/fs: fix initial stack reservation
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 18:04:18 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100215180347.72AD.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15521.1266224231@neuling.org>
> In message <20100215155821.7298.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> you wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > In message <20100214164023.GA2726@jm.kir.nu> you wrote:
> > > > It looks like the commit 803bf5ec259941936262d10ecc84511b76a20921
> > > > (fs/exec.c: restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit) broke my
> > > > user mode Linux setup by somehow preventing system setup from running
> > > > properly (or killing some processes that try to mount things, etc.).
> > > > This commit turned up as the reason based on git bisect and reverting it
> > > > fixes my UML test setup (Ubuntu 9.10 on both host and in UML and AMD64
> > > > arch for both). I have no idea what exactly would be the main cause for
> > > > this issue, but this looks like a somewhat unfortunately timed
> > > > regression in 2.6.33-rc8.
> > > >
> > > > The failed run shows like this (with current linux-2.6.git):
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > > EXT3-fs (ubda): mounted filesystem with writeback data mode
> > > > VFS: Mounted root (ext3 filesystem) readonly on device 98:0.
> > > > IRQ 3/console-write: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > IRQ 2/console: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > IRQ 10/winch: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > IRQ 10/winch: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > mountall: mount /sys/kernel/debug [218] killed by KILL signal
> > > > mountall: Filesystem could not be mounted: /sys/kernel/debug
> > > > mountall: mount /dev [219] killed by KILL signal
> > > > mountall: Filesystem could not be mounted: /dev
> > > > mountall: mount /tmp [220] killed by KILL signal
> > > > mountall: Filesystem could not be mounted: /tmp
> > > > mountall: mount /var/lock [222] killed by KILL signal
> > > > mountall: Filesystem could not be mounted: /var/lock
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With 803bf5ec reverted, UML comes up and the output looks like this:
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > > EXT3-fs (ubda): mounted filesystem with writeback data mode
> > > > VFS: Mounted root (ext3 filesystem) readonly on device 98:0.
> > > > IRQ 3/console-write: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > IRQ 2/console: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > IRQ 10/winch: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > IRQ 10/winch: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs
> > > > init: procps main process (226) terminated with status 255
> > > > fsck from util-linux-ng 2.16
> > > > ...
> > >
> > > Jouni,
> > >
> > > I can reproduce this now.
> > >
> > > We got the logic wrong in one of the cleanups and hence we aren't
> > > actually changing the stack reservation ever, when we intended on
> > > allocating up to 20 new pages.
> > >
> > > The:
> > > rlim_stack = min(rlim_stack, stack_size);
> > > always chooses stack_size hence we end up not changing the stack at all.
> > > This seems to cause fatal problems on UML, but is obviously not what was
> > > intended for archs as well.
> > >
> > > The following works for me on PPC64 64k and 4k pages and UML on x86_64.
> > >
> > > Let me know if it fixes it for you also.
> > >
> > > Mikey
> > >
> > >
> > > exec/fs: fix initial stack reservation
> > >
> > > 803bf5ec259941936262d10ecc84511b76a20921 (fs/exec.c: restrict initial
> > > stack space expansion to rlimit) attempts to limit the initial stack to
> > > 20*PAGE_SIZE. Unfortunately, in also attempting ensure the stack is not
> > > reduced in size, we ended up not changing the stack at all.
> > >
> > > This caused a regression in UML resulting in most guest processes to be
> > > killed.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
> > > cc: <stable@kernel.org>
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
> > > index e95c692..e0e7b3c 100644
> > > --- a/fs/exec.c
> > > +++ b/fs/exec.c
> > > @@ -637,15 +637,16 @@ int setup_arg_pages(struct linux_binprm *bprm,
> > > * will align it up.
> > > */
> > > rlim_stack = rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK) & PAGE_MASK;
> > > - rlim_stack = min(rlim_stack, stack_size);
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_STACK_GROWSUP
> > > if (stack_size + stack_expand > rlim_stack)
> > > - stack_base = vma->vm_start + rlim_stack;
> > > + /* Expand only to rlimit, making sure not to shrink it */
> > > + stack_base = vma->vm_start + max(rlim_stack,stack_size);
> > > else
> > > stack_base = vma->vm_end + stack_expand;
> > > #else
> > > if (stack_size + stack_expand > rlim_stack)
> > > - stack_base = vma->vm_end - rlim_stack;
> > > + /* Expand only to rlimit, making sure not to shrink it */
> > > + stack_base = vma->vm_end - max(rlim_stack,stack_size);
> > > else
> > > stack_base = vma->vm_start - stack_expand;
> > > #endif
> >
> > - rlim_stack = min(rlim_stack, stack_size);
> > + /* Expand only to rlimit, making sure not to shrink it */
> > + rlim_stack = max(rlim_stack, stack_size);
> >
> > is better fix?
>
> Actually, I think we can just get rid of min() line altogether.
> expand_stack checks to make sure the stack is getting bigger, otherwise
> it does nothing. We don't need to bother with this check.
>
> The below works for me on UML x86_64 and ppc64 64k and 4k pages.
OK, Right you are.
Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
>
> Mikey
>
> exec/fs: fix initial stack reservation
>
> 803bf5ec259941936262d10ecc84511b76a20921 (fs/exec.c: restrict initial
> stack space expansion to rlimit) attempts to limit the initial stack to
> 20*PAGE_SIZE. Unfortunately, in attempting ensure the stack is not
> reduced in size, we ended up not changing the stack at all.
>
> This size reduction check is not necessary as the expand_stack call does
> this already.
>
> This caused a regression in UML resulting in most guest processes being
> killed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
> cc: <stable@kernel.org>
> ---
> fs/exec.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6-ozlabs/fs/exec.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-ozlabs.orig/fs/exec.c
> +++ linux-2.6-ozlabs/fs/exec.c
> @@ -637,7 +637,6 @@ int setup_arg_pages(struct linux_binprm
> * will align it up.
> */
> rlim_stack = rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK) & PAGE_MASK;
> - rlim_stack = min(rlim_stack, stack_size);
> #ifdef CONFIG_STACK_GROWSUP
> if (stack_size + stack_expand > rlim_stack)
> stack_base = vma->vm_start + rlim_stack;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-15 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-14 16:40 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit Jouni Malinen
2010-02-14 22:03 ` Michael Neuling
2010-02-15 2:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-15 7:02 ` Jouni Malinen
2010-02-15 6:56 ` Jouni Malinen
2010-02-14 23:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-15 6:30 ` Michael Neuling
2010-02-15 6:59 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-15 7:17 ` Jouni Malinen
2010-02-15 8:57 ` [PATCH] exec/fs: fix initial stack reservation Michael Neuling
2010-02-15 9:04 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2010-02-15 9:08 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-15 8:57 ` 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit Américo Wang
2010-02-15 9:03 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-15 7:12 ` Jouni Malinen
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=20100215180347.72AD.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=j@w1.fi \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.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®