Subject: lib: proportion: fix underflow in prop_norm_percpu() Zhe Jiang noticed that its possible to underflow pl->events in prop_norm_percpu() when the value returned by percpu_counter_read() is less than the error on that read and the period delay > 1. In that case half might not trigger the batch increment and the value will be identical on the next iteration, causing the same half to be subtracted again and again. Fix this by rewriting the division as a single subtraction instead of a subtraction loop and using percpu_counter_sum() when the value returned by percpu_counter_read() is smaller than the error. The latter is still needed if we want pl->events to shrink properly in the error region. Jiang, can I get a Reviewed-by from you? - if you agree that is :-) Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> Cc: zhejiang <[email protected]> --- lib/proportions.c | 36 +++++++++++++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6/lib/proportions.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/lib/proportions.c +++ linux-2.6/lib/proportions.c @@ -190,6 +190,8 @@ prop_adjust_shift(int *pl_shift, unsigne * PERCPU */ +#define PROP_BATCH (8*(1+ilog2(nr_cpu_ids))) + int prop_local_init_percpu(struct prop_local_percpu *pl) { spin_lock_init(&pl->lock); @@ -230,31 +232,23 @@ void prop_norm_percpu(struct prop_global spin_lock_irqsave(&pl->lock, flags); prop_adjust_shift(&pl->shift, &pl->period, pg->shift); + /* * For each missed period, we half the local counter. * basically: * pl->events >> (global_period - pl->period); - * - * but since the distributed nature of percpu counters make division - * rather hard, use a regular subtraction loop. This is safe, because - * the events will only every be incremented, hence the subtraction - * can never result in a negative number. */ - while (pl->period != global_period) { - unsigned long val = percpu_counter_read(&pl->events); - unsigned long half = (val + 1) >> 1; - - /* - * Half of zero won't be much less, break out. - * This limits the loop to shift iterations, even - * if we missed a million. - */ - if (!val) - break; - - percpu_counter_add(&pl->events, -half); - pl->period += period; - } + period = (global_period - pl->period) >> (pg->shift - 1); + if (period < BITS_PER_LONG) { + s64 val = percpu_counter_read(&pl->events); + + if (val < (nr_cpu_ids * PROP_BATCH)) + val = percpu_counter_sum(&pl->events); + + __percpu_counter_add(&pl->events, -val + (val >> period), PROP_BATCH); + } else + percpu_counter_set(&pl->events, 0); + pl->period = global_period; spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pl->lock, flags); } @@ -267,7 +261,7 @@ void __prop_inc_percpu(struct prop_descr struct prop_global *pg = prop_get_global(pd); prop_norm_percpu(pg, pl); - percpu_counter_add(&pl->events, 1); + __percpu_counter_add(&pl->events, 1, PROP_BATCH); percpu_counter_add(&pg->events, 1); prop_put_global(pd, pg); }
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- [PATCH]Avoid the overflow when calculate the proportion of bdi quota
- From: zhejiang <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH]Avoid the overflow when calculate the proportion of bdi quota
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH]Avoid the overflow when calculate the proportion of bdi quota
- From: zhejiang <[email protected]>
- [PATCH]Avoid the overflow when calculate the proportion of bdi quota
- Prev by Date: [PATCH]: 2.6.24-rc5: mtd: PNC-2000 oops
- Next by Date: Re: Attitude problems.
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH]Avoid the overflow when calculate the proportion of bdi quota
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] lib: proportion: fix underflow in prop_norm_percpu()
- Index(es):