Re: Possible memory ordering bug in page reclaim?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Linus Torvalds wrote:

I agree, however, that it looks like PG_dirty is racy. Probably not in practice, but still.

So I'd suggest adding a smp_wmb() into set_page_dirty, and the rmb where Nick suggested.

So I'd suggest a patch something more like this.. Marking the dirty/count cases unlikely too in mm/page-writeback.c, since we should have tested for these conditions optimistically outside the lock.


As Dave suggested, I think there is too much other code that depends on
these atomics to be barriers for us to change it (at least not in this
patch! :)).


Comments? Nick, did you have some test-case that you think might actually have been impacted by this?


I guess your vmscan.c hunks are slightly nicer, though I might put
'cannot_free' right at the end, because it will be a very uncommon case.

And no, I don't have a test case. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if
nobody anywhere has ever hit it :) I was just browsing code...

Thanks,
Nick

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux