All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	peterx@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Zi Yan <zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] userfaultfd: selftest: recycle lock threads first
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 16:43:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180929084311.15600-4-peterx@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180929084311.15600-1-peterx@redhat.com>

Now we recycle the uffd servicing threads earlier than the lock
threads.  It might happen that when the lock thread is still blocked at
a pthread mutex lock while the servicing thread has already quitted for
the cpu so the lock thread will be blocked forever and hang the test
program.  To fix the possible race, recycle the lock threads first.

This never happens with current missing-only tests, but when I start to
run the write-protection tests (the feature is not yet posted upstream)
it happens every time of the run possibly because in that new test we'll
need to service two page faults for each lock operation.

Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 11 ++++++-----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
index f79706f13ce7..a388675b15af 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
@@ -623,6 +623,12 @@ static int stress(unsigned long *userfaults)
 	if (uffd_test_ops->release_pages(area_src))
 		return 1;
 
+
+	finished = 1;
+	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++)
+		if (pthread_join(locking_threads[cpu], NULL))
+			return 1;
+
 	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++) {
 		char c;
 		if (bounces & BOUNCE_POLL) {
@@ -640,11 +646,6 @@ static int stress(unsigned long *userfaults)
 		}
 	}
 
-	finished = 1;
-	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++)
-		if (pthread_join(locking_threads[cpu], NULL))
-			return 1;
-
 	return 0;
 }
 
-- 
2.17.1


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: peterx at redhat.com (Peter Xu)
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] userfaultfd: selftest: recycle lock threads first
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 16:43:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180929084311.15600-4-peterx@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180929084311.15600-1-peterx@redhat.com>

Now we recycle the uffd servicing threads earlier than the lock
threads.  It might happen that when the lock thread is still blocked at
a pthread mutex lock while the servicing thread has already quitted for
the cpu so the lock thread will be blocked forever and hang the test
program.  To fix the possible race, recycle the lock threads first.

This never happens with current missing-only tests, but when I start to
run the write-protection tests (the feature is not yet posted upstream)
it happens every time of the run possibly because in that new test we'll
need to service two page faults for each lock operation.

Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx at redhat.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 11 ++++++-----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
index f79706f13ce7..a388675b15af 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
@@ -623,6 +623,12 @@ static int stress(unsigned long *userfaults)
 	if (uffd_test_ops->release_pages(area_src))
 		return 1;
 
+
+	finished = 1;
+	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++)
+		if (pthread_join(locking_threads[cpu], NULL))
+			return 1;
+
 	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++) {
 		char c;
 		if (bounces & BOUNCE_POLL) {
@@ -640,11 +646,6 @@ static int stress(unsigned long *userfaults)
 		}
 	}
 
-	finished = 1;
-	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++)
-		if (pthread_join(locking_threads[cpu], NULL))
-			return 1;
-
 	return 0;
 }
 
-- 
2.17.1

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: peterx@redhat.com (Peter Xu)
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] userfaultfd: selftest: recycle lock threads first
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 16:43:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180929084311.15600-4-peterx@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20180929084311.9fCZSgDDOcitxED73-HNMVw_cNaaMYgKwjDGfJD_oBU@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180929084311.15600-1-peterx@redhat.com>

Now we recycle the uffd servicing threads earlier than the lock
threads.  It might happen that when the lock thread is still blocked at
a pthread mutex lock while the servicing thread has already quitted for
the cpu so the lock thread will be blocked forever and hang the test
program.  To fix the possible race, recycle the lock threads first.

This never happens with current missing-only tests, but when I start to
run the write-protection tests (the feature is not yet posted upstream)
it happens every time of the run possibly because in that new test we'll
need to service two page faults for each lock operation.

Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx at redhat.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 11 ++++++-----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
index f79706f13ce7..a388675b15af 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
@@ -623,6 +623,12 @@ static int stress(unsigned long *userfaults)
 	if (uffd_test_ops->release_pages(area_src))
 		return 1;
 
+
+	finished = 1;
+	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++)
+		if (pthread_join(locking_threads[cpu], NULL))
+			return 1;
+
 	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++) {
 		char c;
 		if (bounces & BOUNCE_POLL) {
@@ -640,11 +646,6 @@ static int stress(unsigned long *userfaults)
 		}
 	}
 
-	finished = 1;
-	for (cpu = 0; cpu < nr_cpus; cpu++)
-		if (pthread_join(locking_threads[cpu], NULL))
-			return 1;
-
 	return 0;
 }
 
-- 
2.17.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-09-29  8:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-29  8:43 [PATCH 0/3] userfaultfd: selftests: cleanups and trivial fixes Peter Xu
2018-09-29  8:43 ` Peter Xu
2018-09-29  8:43 ` peterx
2018-09-29  8:43 ` [PATCH 1/3] userfaultfd: selftest: cleanup help messages Peter Xu
2018-09-29  8:43   ` Peter Xu
2018-09-29  8:43   ` peterx
2018-09-29 10:28   ` Mike Rapoport
2018-09-29 10:28     ` Mike Rapoport
2018-09-29 10:28     ` rppt
2018-09-30  6:34     ` Peter Xu
2018-09-30  6:34       ` Peter Xu
2018-09-30  6:34       ` peterx
2018-09-29  8:43 ` [PATCH 2/3] userfaultfd: selftest: generalize read and poll Peter Xu
2018-09-29  8:43   ` Peter Xu
2018-09-29  8:43   ` peterx
2018-09-29 10:31   ` Mike Rapoport
2018-09-29 10:31     ` Mike Rapoport
2018-09-29 10:31     ` rppt
2018-09-29  8:43 ` Peter Xu [this message]
2018-09-29  8:43   ` [PATCH 3/3] userfaultfd: selftest: recycle lock threads first Peter Xu
2018-09-29  8:43   ` peterx
2018-09-29 10:32   ` Mike Rapoport
2018-09-29 10:32     ` Mike Rapoport
2018-09-29 10:32     ` rppt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180929084311.15600-4-peterx@redhat.com \
    --to=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=shli@fb.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.