Re: [Patch 6/6] per task delay accounting taskstats interface: fix clone skbs for each listener
From: Shailabh Nagar <hidden>
Date: 2006-07-12 05:41:54
Also in:
lkml
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 07:15, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 03:57:31AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
down_write(&listeners->sem); list_for_each_entry_safe(s, tmp, &listeners->list, list) { - ret = genlmsg_unicast(skb, s->pid); + skb_next = NULL; + if (!list_islast(&s->list, &listeners->list)) { + skb_next = skb_clone(skb_cur, GFP_KERNEL);If we do a GFP_KERNEL allocation with this semaphore held, and the oom-killer tries to kill something to satisfy the allocation, and the killed task gets stuck on that semaphore, I wonder of the box locks up.We do GFP_KERNEL inside semaphores/mutexes in lots of places. So if this can deadlock with the oom-killer we probably should fix that, preferably by having GFP_KERNEL fail in that case.This lock is special, in that it's taken on the exit() path (I think). So it can block tasks which are trying to exit.Sorry, missed the context. If there is a deadlock then it's not just this allocation that you need worry about. There is also an allocation within genlmsg_uniast that would be GFP_KERNEL.
Remove down_write() from taskstats code invoked on the exit() path. In send_cpu_listeners(), which is called on the exit path, a down_write() was protecting operations like skb_clone() and genlmsg_unicast() that do GFP_KERNEL allocations. If the oom-killer decides to kill tasks to satisfy the allocations,the exit of those tasks could block on the same semphore. The down_write() was only needed to allow removal of invalid listeners from the listener list. The patch converts the down_write to a down_read and defers the removal to a separate critical region. This ensures that even if the oom-killer is called, no other task's exit is blocked as it can still acquire another down_read. Thanks to Andrew Morton & Herbert Xu for pointing out the oom related pitfalls, and to Chandra Seetharaman for suggesting this fix instead of using something more complex like RCU. Signed-Off-By: Chandra Seetharaman <redacted> Signed-Off-By: Shailabh Nagar <redacted> --- kernel/taskstats.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++----- 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6.18-rc1/kernel/taskstats.c ===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.18-rc1.orig/kernel/taskstats.c 2006-07-11 00:13:00.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-2.6.18-rc1/kernel/taskstats.c 2006-07-12 00:07:53.000000000 -0400@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ __read_mostly = { struct listener { struct list_head list; pid_t pid; + char valid; }; struct listener_list {
@@ -127,7 +128,7 @@ static int send_cpu_listeners(struct sk_ struct listener *s, *tmp; struct sk_buff *skb_next, *skb_cur = skb; void *reply = genlmsg_data(genlhdr); - int rc, ret; + int rc, ret, delcount = 0; rc = genlmsg_end(skb, reply); if (rc < 0) {
@@ -137,7 +138,7 @@ static int send_cpu_listeners(struct sk_ rc = 0; listeners = &per_cpu(listener_array, cpu); - down_write(&listeners->sem); + down_read(&listeners->sem); list_for_each_entry_safe(s, tmp, &listeners->list, list) { skb_next = NULL; if (!list_islast(&s->list, &listeners->list)) {
@@ -150,14 +151,26 @@ static int send_cpu_listeners(struct sk_ } ret = genlmsg_unicast(skb_cur, s->pid); if (ret == -ECONNREFUSED) { - list_del(&s->list); - kfree(s); + s->valid = 0; + delcount++; rc = ret; } skb_cur = skb_next; } - up_write(&listeners->sem); + up_read(&listeners->sem); + + if (!delcount) + return rc; + /* Delete invalidated entries */ + down_write(&listeners->sem); + list_for_each_entry_safe(s, tmp, &listeners->list, list) { + if (!s->valid) { + list_del(&s->list); + kfree(s); + } + } + up_write(&listeners->sem); return rc; }
@@ -290,6 +303,7 @@ static int add_del_listener(pid_t pid, c goto cleanup; s->pid = pid; INIT_LIST_HEAD(&s->list); + s->valid = 1; listeners = &per_cpu(listener_array, cpu); down_write(&listeners->sem);