From: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>
To: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] radix-tree: fix radix_tree_iter_retry() for tagged iterators.
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 12:07:37 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALYGNiPGYOJnnp3DcXdNJCLQ2=oW0=gxJ6CyZooa+i5rtNhJ+g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160719041123.GB2779@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Ross Zwisler
<ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 04:45:31PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Ross Zwisler
>> <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> <>
>> > 3) radix_tree_iter_next() via via a non-tagged iteration like
>> > radix_tree_for_each_slot(). This currently happens in shmem_tag_pins()
>> > and shmem_partial_swap_usage().
>> >
>> > I think that this case is currently unhandled. Unlike with
>> > radix_tree_iter_retry() case (#1 above) we can't rely on 'count' in the else
>> > case of radix_tree_next_slot() to be zero, so I think it's possible we'll end
>> > up executing code in the while() loop in radix_tree_next_slot() that assumes
>> > 'slot' is valid.
>> >
>> > I haven't actually seen this crash on a test setup, but I don't think the
>> > current code is safe.
>>
>> This is becase distance between ->index and ->next_index now could be
>> more that one?
>>
>> We could fix that by adding "iter->index = iter->next_index - 1;" into
>> radix_tree_iter_next()
>> right after updating next_index and tweak multi-order itreration logic
>> if it depends on that.
>>
>> I'd like to keep radix_tree_next_slot() as small as possible because
>> this is supposed to be a fast-path.
>
> I think it'll be exactly one?
>
> iter->next_index = __radix_tree_iter_add(iter, 1);
>
> So iter->index will be X, iter->next_index will be X+1, accounting for the
> iterator's shift. So, basically, whatever your height is, you'll be set up to
> process one more entry, I think.
>
> This means that radix_tree_chunk_size() will return 1. I guess with the
> current logic this is safe:
>
> static __always_inline void **
> radix_tree_next_slot(void **slot, struct radix_tree_iter *iter, unsigned flags)
> {
> ...
> } else {
> long count = radix_tree_chunk_size(iter);
> void *canon = slot;
>
> while (--count > 0) {
> /* code that assumes 'slot' is non-NULL */
>
> So 'count' will be 1, the prefix decrement will make it 0, so we won't execute
> the code in the while() loop. So maybe all the cases are covered after all.
>
> It seems like we need some unit tests in tools/testing/radix-tree around this
> - I'll try and find time to add them this week.
>
> I just feel like this isn't very organized. We have a lot of code in
> radix_tree_next_slot() that assumes that 'slot' is non-NULL, but we don't
> check it anywhere. We know it *can* be NULL, but we just happen to have
> things set up so that none of the code that uses 'slot' is executed.
>
> I personally feel like a quick check for slot==NULL at the beginning of the
> function is the simplest way to keep ourselves safe, and it doesn't seem like
> we'd be adding that much overhead.
Either fix is fine now. I working on better design for multiorder iterator which
moves all that logic from radix_tree_next_slot() into radix_tree_next_chunk().
Most likely I'll change tree structure a little. For example I think sibling
entries chould hold offset to head entry and order rather than a pointer to it.
Or maybe size: support of non-power-of-2 entries is interesting feature too.
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-19 9:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-05 11:39 mm: GPF in find_get_pages_tag Dmitry Vyukov
2016-07-14 11:19 ` [PATCH] radix-tree: fix radix_tree_iter_retry() for tagged iterators Andrey Ryabinin
2016-07-14 12:21 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2016-07-14 22:25 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-07-15 8:52 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2016-07-15 19:00 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-07-15 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2016-07-18 23:09 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-07-16 13:45 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2016-07-17 17:57 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2016-07-19 4:11 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-07-19 9:07 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov [this message]
2016-07-15 19:03 ` mm: GPF in find_get_pages_tag Ross Zwisler
2016-07-15 19:07 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2016-07-15 20:21 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-07-15 20:25 ` Dmitry Vyukov
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='CALYGNiPGYOJnnp3DcXdNJCLQ2=oW0=gxJ6CyZooa+i5rtNhJ+g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=koct9i@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kcc@google.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.com \
--cc=willy@linux.intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).