Re: [PATCH] mm: khugepaged: fix potential page state corruption

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 3/18/20 5:12 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 07:19:42AM +0800, Yang Shi wrote:
When khugepaged collapses anonymous pages, the base pages would be freed
via pagevec or free_page_and_swap_cache().  But, the anonymous page may
be added back to LRU, then it might result in the below race:

	CPU A				CPU B
khugepaged:
   unlock page
   putback_lru_page
     add to lru
				page reclaim:
				  isolate this page
				  try_to_unmap
   page_remove_rmap <-- corrupt _mapcount

It looks nothing would prevent the pages from isolating by reclaimer.
Hm. Why should it?

try_to_unmap() doesn't exclude parallel page unmapping. _mapcount is
protected by ptl. And this particular _mapcount pin is reachable for
reclaim as it's not part of usual page table tree. Basically
try_to_unmap() will never succeeds until we give up the _mapcount on
khugepaged side.

I don't quite get. What does "not part of usual page table tree" means?

How's about try_to_unmap() acquires ptl before khugepaged?


I don't see the issue right away.

The other problem is the page's active or unevictable flag might be
still set when freeing the page via free_page_and_swap_cache().
So what?

The flags may leak to page free path then kernel may complain if DEBUG_VM is set.


The putback_lru_page() would not clear those two flags if the pages are
released via pagevec, it sounds nothing prevents from isolating active
or unevictable pages.
Again, why should it? vmscan is equipped to deal with this.

I don't mean vmscan, I mean khugepaged may isolate active and unevictable pages since it just simply walks page table.


However I didn't really run into these problems, just in theory by visual
inspection.

And, it also seems unnecessary to have the pages add back to LRU again since
they are about to be freed when reaching this point.  So, clearing active
and unevictable flags, unlocking and dropping refcount from isolate
instead of calling putback_lru_page() as what page cache collapse does.
Hm? But we do call putback_lru_page() on the way out. I do not follow.

It just calls putback_lru_page() at error path, not success path. Putting pages back to lru on error path definitely makes sense. Here it is the success path.


Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  mm/khugepaged.c | 10 +++++++++-
  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/khugepaged.c b/mm/khugepaged.c
index b679908..f42fa4e 100644
--- a/mm/khugepaged.c
+++ b/mm/khugepaged.c
@@ -673,7 +673,6 @@ static void __collapse_huge_page_copy(pte_t *pte, struct page *page,
  			src_page = pte_page(pteval);
  			copy_user_highpage(page, src_page, address, vma);
  			VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(page_mapcount(src_page) != 1, src_page);
-			release_pte_page(src_page);
  			/*
  			 * ptl mostly unnecessary, but preempt has to
  			 * be disabled to update the per-cpu stats
@@ -687,6 +686,15 @@ static void __collapse_huge_page_copy(pte_t *pte, struct page *page,
  			pte_clear(vma->vm_mm, address, _pte);
  			page_remove_rmap(src_page, false);
  			spin_unlock(ptl);
+
+			dec_node_page_state(src_page,
+				NR_ISOLATED_ANON + page_is_file_cache(src_page));
+			ClearPageActive(src_page);
+			ClearPageUnevictable(src_page);
+			unlock_page(src_page);
+			/* Drop refcount from isolate */
+			put_page(src_page);
+
  			free_page_and_swap_cache(src_page);
  		}
  	}
--
1.8.3.1







[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux