Re: mm: kernel BUG at mm/mlock.c:82!

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

 



Hi Motohiro,
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 08:32:49AM -0800, Motohiro Kosaki wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx] On
>> Behalf Of Wanpeng Li
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 3:27 AM
>> To: Sasha Levin
>> Cc: Bob Liu; Andrew Morton; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx; Michel Lespinasse;
>> npiggin@xxxxxxx; Motohiro Kosaki JP; riel@xxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: mm: kernel BUG at mm/mlock.c:82!
>> 
>> Hi Sasha,
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 01:46:54AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> >On 12/17/2013 12:39 AM, Bob Liu wrote:
>> >>cc'd more people.
>> >>
>> >>On 12/17/2013 09:04 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> >>>Hi all,
>> >>>
>> >>>While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest
>> >>>-next kernel, I've stumbled on the following spew.
>> >>>
>> >>>Codewise, it's pretty straightforward. In try_to_unmap_cluster():
>> >>>
>> >>>                 page = vm_normal_page(vma, address, *pte);
>> >>>                 BUG_ON(!page || PageAnon(page));
>> >>>
>> >>>                 if (locked_vma) {
>> >>>                         mlock_vma_page(page);   /* no-op if already
>> >>>mlocked */
>> >>>                         if (page == check_page)
>> >>>                                 ret = SWAP_MLOCK;
>> >>>                         continue;       /* don't unmap */
>> >>>                 }
>> >>>
>> >>>And the BUG triggers once we see that 'page' isn't locked.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>Yes, I didn't see any place locked the corresponding page in
>> >>try_to_unmap_cluster().
>> >>
>> >>I'm afraid adding lock_page() over there may cause potential deadlock.
>> >>How about just remove the BUG_ON() in mlock_vma_page()?
>> >
>> >Welp, it's been there for 5 years now - there should be a good reason to
>> justify removing it.
>> >
>> 
>> Page should be locked before invoke try_to_unmap(), this check can't be
>> removed since this bug is just triggered by confirm !check page hold page
>> lock in virtual scan during nolinear VMAs pages aging. Avoid to confirm !check
>> page hold page lock is acceptable.
>
>That's a try_to_unmap()'s assumption and it already have  BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page)).
>We can remove wrong BUG_ON from mlock_vma_page() simply. Mlock_vma_page() doesn't depend on page-locked.
>

There is a race between mlock_vma_page() and munlock_vma_page(). Both of
them should hold page lock and have a BUG_ON assumption. 

Regards,
Wanpeng Li 

>

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>




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