On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:35 AM Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 10:45:56AM -0700, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 10:35 AM Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 07:56:37AM -0700, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > > > If this happens it seems possible for this to happen:
> > > >
> > > > cpu #1 cpu#2
> > > > css_put()
> > > > /* css_free_rwork_fn is queued */
> > > > rcu_read_lock()
> > > > mem_cgroup_from_id()
> > > > mem_cgroup_id_remove()
> > > > /* access memcg */
> > >
> > > I don't quite see how that'd possible. IDR uses rcu_assign_pointer()
> > > during deletion, which inserts the necessary barriering. My
> > > understanding is that this should always be safe:
> > >
> > > rcu_read_lock() (writer serialization, in this case ref count == 0)
> > > foo = idr_find(x) idr_remove(x)
> > > if (foo) kfree_rcu(foo)
> > > LOAD(foo->bar)
> > > rcu_read_unlock()
> >
> > How does a barrier inside IDR removal protect against the memcg being
> > freed here though?
> >
> > If css_put() is executed out-of-order before mem_cgroup_id_remove(),
> > the memcg can be freed even before mem_cgroup_id_remove() is called,
> > right?
>
> css_put() can start earlier, but it's not allowed to reorder the rcu
> callback that frees past the rcu_assign_pointer() in idr_remove().
>
> This is what RCU and its access primitives guarantees. It ensures that
> after "unpublishing" the pointer, all concurrent RCU-protected
> accesses to the object have finished, and the memory can be freed.
I am not sure I understand, this is the scenario I mean:
cpu#1 cpu#2 cpu#3
css_put()
/* schedule free */
rcu_read_lock()
idr_remove()
mem_cgroup_from_id()
/* free memcg */
/* use memcg */
If I understand correctly you are saying that the scheduled free
callback cannot run before idr_remove() due to the barrier in there,
but it can run after the rcu_read_lock() in cpu #2 because it was
scheduled before that RCU critical section started, right?
