Re: [PATCH] mm: fix potential pte_unmap_unlock pte error

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

 



On 2020/10/16 22:05, osalvador@xxxxxxx wrote:
On 2020-10-16 15:42, Michal Hocko wrote:
OK, I finally managed to convince my friday brain to think and grasped
what the code is intended to do. The loop is hairy and we want to
prevent from spurious EIO when all the pages are on a proper node. So
the check has to be done inside the loop. Anyway I would find the
following fix less error prone and easier to follow
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index eddbe4e56c73..8cc1fc9c4d13 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ static int queue_pages_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
unsigned long addr,
     unsigned long flags = qp->flags;
     int ret;
     bool has_unmovable = false;
-    pte_t *pte;
+    pte_t *pte, *mapped_pte;
     spinlock_t *ptl;

     ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
@@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ static int queue_pages_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
unsigned long addr,
     if (pmd_trans_unstable(pmd))
         return 0;

-    pte = pte_offset_map_lock(walk->mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
+    mapped_pte = pte = pte_offset_map_lock(walk->mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
     for (; addr != end; pte++, addr += PAGE_SIZE) {
         if (!pte_present(*pte))
             continue;
@@ -571,7 +571,7 @@ static int queue_pages_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
unsigned long addr,
         } else
             break;
     }
-    pte_unmap_unlock(pte - 1, ptl);
+    pte_unmap_unlock(mapped_pte, ptl);
     cond_resched();

     if (has_unmovable)

It is more clear to grasp, definitely.
Yeah, this one is more comprehensible, I 'll send a v2 patch, thank you.





[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