Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH -mm -v5 RESEND] mm, swap: Fix race between swapoff and some swap operations




On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 09:42:20 +0800 "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> When the swapin is performed, after getting the swap entry information
> from the page table, system will swap in the swap entry, without any
> lock held to prevent the swap device from being swapoff.  This may
> cause the race like below,

Sigh.  In terms of putting all the work into the swapoff path and
avoiding overheads in the hot paths, I guess this is about as good as
it will get.

It's a very low-priority fix so I'd prefer to keep the patch in -mm
until Hugh has had an opportunity to think about it.

> ...
>  
> +/*
> + * Check whether swap entry is valid in the swap device.  If so,
> + * return pointer to swap_info_struct, and keep the swap entry valid
> + * via preventing the swap device from being swapoff, until
> + * put_swap_device() is called.  Otherwise return NULL.
> + */
> +struct swap_info_struct *get_swap_device(swp_entry_t entry)
> +{
> +	struct swap_info_struct *si;
> +	unsigned long type, offset;
> +
> +	if (!entry.val)
> +		goto out;
> +	type = swp_type(entry);
> +	if (type >= nr_swapfiles)
> +		goto bad_nofile;
> +	si = swap_info[type];
> +
> +	preempt_disable();

This preempt_disable() is later than I'd expect.  If a well-timed race
occurs, `si' could now be pointing at a defunct entry.  If that
well-timed race include a swapoff AND a swapon, `si' could be pointing
at the info for a new device?

> +	if (!(si->flags & SWP_VALID))
> +		goto unlock_out;
> +	offset = swp_offset(entry);
> +	if (offset >= si->max)
> +		goto unlock_out;
> +
> +	return si;
> +bad_nofile:
> +	pr_err("%s: %s%08lx\n", __func__, Bad_file, entry.val);
> +out:
> +	return NULL;
> +unlock_out:
> +	preempt_enable();
> +	return NULL;
> +}