From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fork: fix oops after fork failure
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 16:45:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120823144529.GD19968@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120823143850.GC19968@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Thu 23-08-12 16:38:50, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 23-08-12 16:33:12, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 23-08-12 17:08:46, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > > When we want to duplicate a new process, dup_task_struct() will undergo
> > > a series of allocations. If alloc_thread_info_node() fails, we call
> > > free_task_struct() and return.
> > >
> > > This seems right, but it is not. free_task_struct() will not only free
> > > the task struct from the kmem_cache, but will also call
> > > arch_release_task_struct(). The problem is that this function is
> > > supposed to undo whatever arch-specific work done by
> > > arch_dup_task_struct(), that is not yet called at this point. The
> > > particular problem I ran accross was that in x86, we will arrive at
> > > fpu_free() without having ever allocated it.
> > >
> > > This code is very ancient, and according to git, it is there since the
> > > pre-git era. But forks don't fail that often, so that made it well
> > > hidden.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
> > > Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> > > index 152d023..b397435 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/fork.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> > > @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static struct task_struct *dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *orig)
> > >
> > > ti = alloc_thread_info_node(tsk, node);
> > > if (!ti) {
> > > - free_task_struct(tsk);
> > > + kmem_cache_free(task_struct_cachep, tsk);
> >
> > What about ia64 (or !CONFIG_ARCH_THREAD_INFO_ALLOCATOR in general) which
> > doesn't allocate thread_info at all?
>
> Hit send button too fast. Should read (or CONFIG_ARCH_THREAD_INFO_ALLOCATOR)
> ia64 will not fail obviously and there is no other arch which would
> define own thread infor allocators but there might be some in future.
Bahh, and I should have been looking at CONFIG_ARCH_TASK_STRUCT_ALLOCATOR
instead. Anyway ia64 uses page allocator directly so kmem_cache_free is
not appropriate.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-23 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-23 13:08 Glauber Costa
2012-08-23 14:33 ` Michal Hocko
2012-08-23 14:38 ` Glauber Costa
2012-08-23 14:38 ` Michal Hocko
2012-08-23 14:45 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2012-08-23 14:43 ` Glauber Costa
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=20120823144529.GD19968@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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
Powered by JetHome