[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86: hold mm->page_table_lock while doing vmalloc_sync
On 02/02/2011 09:48 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: Hello, Larry (CC'ed) found a problem with the patch in subject. When USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS is not defined (NR_CPUS == 2) it will deadlock in ptep_clear_flush_notify in rmap.c because it's sending IPIs with the page_table_lock already held, and the other CPUs now spins on the page_table_lock with irq disabled, so the IPI never runs. With CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE=y this deadlocks happens even with USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS defined so it become visible but it needs to be fixed regardless (for NR_CPUS == 2). I'd like to understand why the pgd_lock needs irq disabled, it sounds too easy that I can just remove the _irqsave, doesn't it? A pgd_free comment says it can run from irq. page_table_lock having to be taken there is for Xen only, but other archs also uses spin_lock_irqsave(pgd_lock) so I guess it's either common code, or it's superfluous and not another Xen special requirement. If we could remove that _irqsave like below it'd solve it... But clearly something must be taking the pgd_lock from irq. (using a rwlock would also be possible as long as nobody takes it in write mode during irq, but if it's pgd_free that really runs in irq, that would need the write_lock so it wouldn't be a solution). I'm trying this fix and the VM_BUG_ON never triggered yet. In short: who takes the pgd_lock from an irq? (__mmdrop shouldn't but maybe I'm overlooking some aio bit?) This is the specifics: The problem is with THP. The page reclaim code calls page_referenced_one() which takes the mm->page_table_lock on one CPU before sending an IPI to other CPU(s): On CPU1 we take the mm->page_table_lock, send IPIs and wait for a response: page_referenced_one(...) if (unlikely(PageTransHuge(page))) { pmd_t *pmd; spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock); pmd = page_check_address_pmd(page, mm, address, PAGE_CHECK_ADDRESS_PMD_FLAG); if (pmd&& !pmd_trans_splitting(*pmd)&& pmdp_clear_flush_young_notify(vma, address, pmd)) referenced++; spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock); } else { CPU2 can race in vmalloc_sync_all() because it disables interrupt(preventing a response to the IPI from CPU1) and takes the pgd_lock then spins in the mm->page_table_lock which is already held on CPU1. spin_lock_irqsave(&pgd_lock, flags); list_for_each_entry(page,&pgd_list, lru) { pgd_t *pgd; spinlock_t *pgt_lock; pgd = (pgd_t *)page_address(page) + pgd_index(address); pgt_lock =&pgd_page_get_mm(page)->page_table_lock; spin_lock(pgt_lock); At this point the system is deadlocked. The pmdp_clear_flush_young_notify needs to do its PDG business with the page_table_lock held then release that lock before sending the IPIs to the other CPUs. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |