From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
Cc: gregkh@linux-foundation.org, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org,
rientjes@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@kernel.org, mgorman@suse.de,
vbabka@suse.cz, andrea@kernel.org, kirill@shutemov.name,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [STABLE PATCH] slub: make ->cpu_partial unsigned int
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:50:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180930125038.GA2533@bombadil.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1538303301-61784-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com>
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 06:28:21PM +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
> From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
>
> [ Upstream commit e5d9998f3e09359b372a037a6ac55ba235d95d57 ]
>
> /*
> * cpu_partial determined the maximum number of objects
> * kept in the per cpu partial lists of a processor.
> */
>
> Can't be negative.
>
> I hit a real issue that it will result in a large number of memory leak.
> Becuase Freeing slabs are in interrupt context. So it can trigger this issue.
> put_cpu_partial can be interrupted more than once.
> due to a union struct of lru and pobjects in struct page, when other core handles
> page->lru list, for eaxmple, remove_partial in freeing slab code flow, It will
> result in pobjects being a negative value(0xdead0000). Therefore, a large number
> of slabs will be added to per_cpu partial list.
>
> I had posted the issue to community before. The detailed issue description is as follows.
>
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2870979.html
>
> After applying the patch, The issue is fixed. So the patch is a effective bugfix.
> It should go into stable.
>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180305200730.15812-15-adobriyan@gmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
> Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Hang on. Christoph acked the _original_ patch going into upstream.
When he reviewed this patch for _stable_ last week, he asked for more
investigation. Including this patch in stable is misleading.
> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 4.4.x
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
> ---
> include/linux/slub_def.h | 3 ++-
> mm/slub.c | 6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/slub_def.h b/include/linux/slub_def.h
> index 3388511..9b681f2 100644
> --- a/include/linux/slub_def.h
> +++ b/include/linux/slub_def.h
> @@ -67,7 +67,8 @@ struct kmem_cache {
> int size; /* The size of an object including meta data */
> int object_size; /* The size of an object without meta data */
> int offset; /* Free pointer offset. */
> - int cpu_partial; /* Number of per cpu partial objects to keep around */
> + /* Number of per cpu partial objects to keep around */
> + unsigned int cpu_partial;
> struct kmem_cache_order_objects oo;
>
> /* Allocation and freeing of slabs */
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index 2284c43..c33b0e1 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -1661,7 +1661,7 @@ static void *get_partial_node(struct kmem_cache *s, struct kmem_cache_node *n,
> {
> struct page *page, *page2;
> void *object = NULL;
> - int available = 0;
> + unsigned int available = 0;
> int objects;
>
> /*
> @@ -4674,10 +4674,10 @@ static ssize_t cpu_partial_show(struct kmem_cache *s, char *buf)
> static ssize_t cpu_partial_store(struct kmem_cache *s, const char *buf,
> size_t length)
> {
> - unsigned long objects;
> + unsigned int objects;
> int err;
>
> - err = kstrtoul(buf, 10, &objects);
> + err = kstrtouint(buf, 10, &objects);
> if (err)
> return err;
> if (objects && !kmem_cache_has_cpu_partial(s))
> --
> 1.7.12.4
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-30 12:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-30 10:28 [STABLE PATCH] slub: make ->cpu_partial unsigned int zhong jiang
2018-09-30 12:37 ` Greg KH
2018-09-30 12:50 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2018-09-30 13:10 ` Greg KH
2018-09-30 13:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-10-02 14:50 ` Christopher Lameter
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-09-27 14:43 zhong jiang
2018-09-27 15:26 ` Christopher Lameter
2018-09-27 15:46 ` Greg KH
2018-09-28 8:06 ` zhong jiang
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=20180930125038.GA2533@bombadil.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrea@kernel.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=gregkh@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=zhongjiang@huawei.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).