From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>,
"Ma, Xindong" <xindong.ma@intel.com>,
Sameer Nanda <snanda@chromium.org>,
Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>,
"Tu, Xiaobing" <xiaobing.tu@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] oom_kill: has_intersects_mems_allowed() needs rcu_read_lock()
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 16:37:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131204153753.GH8410@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131204130416.GA6014@redhat.com>
On Wed 04-12-13 14:04:16, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> At least out_of_memory() calls has_intersects_mems_allowed()
> without even rcu_read_lock(), this is obviously buggy.
>
> Add the necessary rcu_read_lock(). This means that we can not
> simply return from the loop, we need "bool ret" and "break".
>
> While at it, swap the names of task_struct's (the argument and
> the local). This cleanups the code a little bit and avoids the
> unnecessary initialization.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-and-Tested-by: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
> Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda <snanda@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Thanks!
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
> 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 96d7945..0d8ad1e 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -47,18 +47,20 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(zone_scan_lock);
> #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> /**
> * has_intersects_mems_allowed() - check task eligiblity for kill
> - * @tsk: task struct of which task to consider
> + * @start: task struct of which task to consider
> * @mask: nodemask passed to page allocator for mempolicy ooms
> *
> * Task eligibility is determined by whether or not a candidate task, @tsk,
> * shares the same mempolicy nodes as current if it is bound by such a policy
> * and whether or not it has the same set of allowed cpuset nodes.
> */
> -static bool has_intersects_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk,
> +static bool has_intersects_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *start,
> const nodemask_t *mask)
> {
> - struct task_struct *start = tsk;
> + struct task_struct *tsk;
> + bool ret = false;
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> for_each_thread(start, tsk) {
> if (mask) {
> /*
> @@ -67,19 +69,20 @@ static bool has_intersects_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk,
> * mempolicy intersects current, otherwise it may be
> * needlessly killed.
> */
> - if (mempolicy_nodemask_intersects(tsk, mask))
> - return true;
> + ret = mempolicy_nodemask_intersects(tsk, mask);
> } else {
> /*
> * This is not a mempolicy constrained oom, so only
> * check the mems of tsk's cpuset.
> */
> - if (cpuset_mems_allowed_intersects(current, tsk))
> - return true;
> + ret = cpuset_mems_allowed_intersects(current, tsk);
> }
> + if (ret)
> + break;
> }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> - return false;
> + return ret;
> }
> #else
> static bool has_intersects_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk,
> --
> 1.5.5.1
>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-04 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-04 13:03 [PATCH v2 0/4] initial while_each_thread() fixes Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] introduce for_each_thread() to replace the buggy while_each_thread() Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-04 13:28 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-12-04 13:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-04 14:17 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-12-04 15:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-05 0:58 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-05 18:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-05 23:23 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] oom_kill: change oom_kill.c to use for_each_thread() Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-04 15:37 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-05 0:39 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] oom_kill: has_intersects_mems_allowed() needs rcu_read_lock() Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-04 15:37 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2013-12-05 0:41 ` David Rientjes
2013-12-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] oom_kill: add rcu_read_lock() into find_lock_task_mm() Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-04 15:40 ` Michal Hocko
2013-12-05 0:42 ` David Rientjes
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=20131204153753.GH8410@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dserrg@gmail.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=msb@chromium.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=snanda@chromium.org \
--cc=xiaobing.tu@intel.com \
--cc=xindong.ma@intel.com \
/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®