On Sun, 19 Jul 2015 15:31:10 +0300 Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This function returns the inode number of the closest online ancestor of
> the memory cgroup a page is charged to. It is required for exporting
> information about which page is charged to which cgroup to userspace,
> which will be introduced by a following patch.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -441,6 +441,29 @@ struct cgroup_subsys_state *mem_cgroup_css_from_page(struct page *page)
> return &memcg->css;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * page_cgroup_ino - return inode number of the memcg a page is charged to
> + * @page: the page
> + *
> + * Look up the closest online ancestor of the memory cgroup @page is charged to
> + * and return its inode number or 0 if @page is not charged to any cgroup. It
> + * is safe to call this function without holding a reference to @page.
> + */
> +unsigned long page_cgroup_ino(struct page *page)
Shouldn't it return an ino_t?
> +{
> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> + unsigned long ino = 0;
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + memcg = READ_ONCE(page->mem_cgroup);
> + while (memcg && !(memcg->css.flags & CSS_ONLINE))
> + memcg = parent_mem_cgroup(memcg);
> + if (memcg)
> + ino = cgroup_ino(memcg->css.cgroup);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return ino;
> +}
The function is racy, isn't it? There's nothing to prevent this inode
from getting torn down and potentially reallocated one nanosecond after
page_cgroup_ino() returns? If so, it is only safely usable by things
which don't care (such as procfs interfaces) and this should be
documented in some fashion.
--
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>