lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: always use address space in inode for resv_map pointer
From
Date


On 2019/4/20 4:44, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> Continuing discussion about commit 58b6e5e8f1ad ("hugetlbfs: fix memory
> leak for resv_map") brought up the issue that inode->i_mapping may not
> point to the address space embedded within the inode at inode eviction
> time. The hugetlbfs truncate routine handles this by explicitly using
> inode->i_data. However, code cleaning up the resv_map will still use
> the address space pointed to by inode->i_mapping. Luckily, private_data
> is NULL for address spaces in all such cases today but, there is no
> guarantee this will continue.
>
> Change all hugetlbfs code getting a resv_map pointer to explicitly get
> it from the address space embedded within the inode. In addition, add
> more comments in the code to indicate why this is being done.
>
> Reported-by: Yufen Yu <yuyufen@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
> ---
> fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c | 11 +++++++++--
> mm/hugetlb.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> index 9285dd4f4b1c..cbc649cd1722 100644
> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> @@ -499,8 +499,15 @@ static void hugetlbfs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
> struct resv_map *resv_map;
>
> remove_inode_hugepages(inode, 0, LLONG_MAX);
> - resv_map = (struct resv_map *)inode->i_mapping->private_data;
> - /* root inode doesn't have the resv_map, so we should check it */
> +
> + /*
> + * Get the resv_map from the address space embedded in the inode.
> + * This is the address space which points to any resv_map allocated
> + * at inode creation time. If this is a device special inode,
> + * i_mapping may not point to the original address space.
> + */
> + resv_map = (struct resv_map *)(&inode->i_data)->private_data;
> + /* Only regular and link inodes have associated reserve maps */
> if (resv_map)
> resv_map_release(&resv_map->refs);
> clear_inode(inode);
> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 6cdc7b2d9100..b30e97b0ef37 100644
> --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -740,7 +740,15 @@ void resv_map_release(struct kref *ref)
>
> static inline struct resv_map *inode_resv_map(struct inode *inode)
> {
> - return inode->i_mapping->private_data;
> + /*
> + * At inode evict time, i_mapping may not point to the original
> + * address space within the inode. This original address space
> + * contains the pointer to the resv_map. So, always use the
> + * address space embedded within the inode.
> + * The VERY common case is inode->mapping == &inode->i_data but,
> + * this may not be true for device special inodes.
> + */
> + return (struct resv_map *)(&inode->i_data)->private_data;
> }
>
> static struct resv_map *vma_resv_map(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> @@ -4477,6 +4485,11 @@ int hugetlb_reserve_pages(struct inode *inode,
> * called to make the mapping read-write. Assume !vma is a shm mapping
> */
> if (!vma || vma->vm_flags & VM_MAYSHARE) {
> + /*
> + * resv_map can not be NULL as hugetlb_reserve_pages is only
> + * called for inodes for which resv_maps were created (see
> + * hugetlbfs_get_inode).
> + */
> resv_map = inode_resv_map(inode);
>
> chg = region_chg(resv_map, from, to);
> @@ -4568,6 +4581,10 @@ long hugetlb_unreserve_pages(struct inode *inode, long start, long end,
> struct hugepage_subpool *spool = subpool_inode(inode);
> long gbl_reserve;
>
> + /*
> + * Since this routine can be called in the evict inode path for all
> + * hugetlbfs inodes, resv_map could be NULL.
> + */
> if (resv_map) {
> chg = region_del(resv_map, start, end);
> /*

Dose this patch have been applied?

I think it is better to add fixes label, like:
Fixes: 58b6e5e8f1ad ("hugetlbfs: fix memory leak for resv_map")

Since the commit 58b6e5e8f1a has been merged to stable, this patch also
be needed.
https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg298740.html





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-08 09:11    [W:0.063 / U:2.804 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site