On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 2:01 AM, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 03:23:36PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
>> migrate_pages() -> unmap_and_move() only calls rcu_read_lock() for anonymous
>> pages, as introduced by git commit 989f89c57e6361e7d16fbd9572b5da7d313b073d.
>> The point of the RCU protection there is part of getting a stable reference
>> to anon_vma and is only held for anon pages as file pages are locked
>> which is sufficient protection against freeing.
>>
>> However, while a file page's mapping is being migrated, the radix
>> tree is double checked to ensure it is the expected page. This uses
>> radix_tree_deref_slot() -> rcu_dereference() without the RCU lock held
>> triggering the following warning under CONFIG_PROVE_RCU.
>>
>> [  173.674290] ===================================================
>> [  173.676016] [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
>> [  173.676016] ---------------------------------------------------
>> [  173.676016] include/linux/radix-tree.h:145 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
>> [  173.676016]
>> [  173.676016] other info that might help us debug this:
>> [  173.676016]
>> [  173.676016]
>> [  173.676016] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
>> [  173.676016] 1 lock held by hugeadm/2899:
>> [  173.676016]  #0:  (&(&inode->i_data.tree_lock)->rlock){..-.-.}, at: [<c10e3d2b>] migrate_page_move_mapping+0x40/0x1ab
>> [  173.676016]
>> [  173.676016] stack backtrace:
>> [  173.676016] Pid: 2899, comm: hugeadm Not tainted 2.6.37-rc5-autobuild
>> [  173.676016] Call Trace:
>> [  173.676016]  [<c128cc01>] ? printk+0x14/0x1b
>> [  173.676016]  [<c1063502>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0x7d/0x86
>> [  173.676016]  [<c10e3db5>] migrate_page_move_mapping+0xca/0x1ab
>> [  173.676016]  [<c10e41ad>] migrate_page+0x23/0x39
>> [  173.676016]  [<c10e491b>] buffer_migrate_page+0x22/0x107
>> [  173.676016]  [<c10e48f9>] ? buffer_migrate_page+0x0/0x107
>> [  173.676016]  [<c10e425d>] move_to_new_page+0x9a/0x1ae
>> [  173.676016]  [<c10e47e6>] migrate_pages+0x1e7/0x2fa
>>
>> This patch introduces radix_tree_deref_slot_protected() which calls
>> rcu_dereference_protected(). Users of it must pass in the mapping->tree_lock
>> that is protecting this dereference. Holding the tree lock protects against
>> parallel updaters of the radix tree meaning that rcu_dereference_protected
>> is allowable.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
>> ---
>>  include/linux/radix-tree.h |   17 +++++++++++++++++
>>  mm/migrate.c               |    4 ++--
>>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/radix-tree.h b/include/linux/radix-tree.h
>> index ab2baa5..a1f1672 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/radix-tree.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/radix-tree.h
>> @@ -146,6 +146,23 @@ static inline void *radix_tree_deref_slot(void **pslot)
>>  }
>>
>>  /**
>> + * radix_tree_deref_slot_protected   - dereference a slot without RCU lock but with tree lock held
>> + * @pslot:   pointer to slot, returned by radix_tree_lookup_slot
>> + * Returns:  item that was stored in that slot with any direct pointer flag
>> + *           removed.
>> + *
>> + * Similar to radix_tree_deref_slot but only used during migration when a pages
>> + * mapping is being moved. The caller does not hold the RCU read lock but it
>> + * must hold the tree lock to prevent parallel updates.
>> + */
>> +static inline void *radix_tree_deref_slot_protected(void **pslot,
>> +                                                     spinlock_t *treelock)
>> +{
>> +     BUG_ON(rcu_read_lock_held());

Hmm.. Why did you add the check?
If rcu_read_lock were already held, we wouldn't need this new API.

quoted text
>
> This was a bad idea. After some extended testing, it was obvious that
> this function can be called for swapcache pages with the RCU lock held.
> Paul, is it still permissible to use rcu_dereference_protected() or must

I guess has no problem.

quoted text
> the RCU read lock not be held?
>



-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/