Re: [PATCH 1/1] hugepages: Fix race between hugetlbfs umount and quota update.
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2011-08-18 22:29:31
Also in:
lkml
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 17:01:15 -0500 Andrew Barry [off-list ref] wrote:
This patch fixes a race between the umount of a hugetlbfs filesystem, and quota updates in that filesystem, which can result in the update of the filesystem quota record, after the record structure has been freed. Rather than an address-space struct pointer, it puts a hugetlbfs_sb_info struct pointer into page_private of the page struct. A reference count and an active bit are added to the hugetlbfs_sb_info struct; the reference count is increased by hugetlb_get_quota and decreased by hugetlb_put_quota. When hugetlbfs is unmounted, it frees the hugetlbfs_sb_info struct, but only if the reference count is zero, otherwise it clears the active bit. The last hugetlb_put_quota then frees the hugetlbfs_sb_info struct. Discussion was titled: Fix refcounting in hugetlbfs quota handling. See: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/11/28
The changelog doesn't actually describe the race - it just asserts that there is one. This makes it unnecessarily difficult to review the fix! So I didn't really look at the code - I just scanned the trivial stuff. The patch was somewhat wordwrapped - please fix the email client then resend.
+ if (hugetlb_get_quota(HUGETLBFS_SB(inode->i_mapping->host->i_sb), chg)) + hugetlb_put_quota(HUGETLBFS_SB(inode->i_mapping->host->i_sb), chg); + set_page_private(page, (unsigned long)HUGETLBFS_SB(inode->i_mapping->host->i_sb)); + hugetlb_put_quota(HUGETLBFS_SB(vma->vm_file->f_mapping->host->i_sb), reserve); + if (hugetlb_get_quota(HUGETLBFS_SB(inode->i_mapping->host->i_sb), chg)) + hugetlb_put_quota(HUGETLBFS_SB(inode->i_mapping->host->i_sb), chg); + hugetlb_put_quota(HUGETLBFS_SB(inode->i_mapping->host->i_sb), (chg - freed));
Are all the inode->i_mapping->host pointer hops actually necessary? I
didn't see anything about them in the changelog and I'd expect that
inode->i_mapping->host is always equal to `inode' for hugetlbfs?
If they _are_ necessary then I'd suggest that the code could be cleaned
up by adding
static struct hugetlbfs_sb_info *inode_to_sb(struct inode *inode)
{
return HUGETLBFS_SB(inode->i_mapping->host->i_sb);
}
to hugetlbfs.c. This will reduce the relatively large number of
checkpatch warnings which were added.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>