Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 20 Feb 2018 15:38:57 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>, jglisse@redhat.com,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -v5 RESEND] mm, swap: Fix race between swapoff and
 some swap operations
Message-Id: <20180220153857.dee8f7d5c904cd7219529312@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAC=cRTMuDtuwCqTK+0UfaTrKcVHzuN4YkHLnH3Yn7FkxknKXtw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180213014220.2464-1-ying.huang@intel.com>
        <20180213154123.9f4ef9e406ea8365ca46d9c5@linux-foundation.org>
        <87fu64jthz.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
        <20180216153823.ad74f1d2c157adc67ed2c970@linux-foundation.org>
        <CAC=cRTMuDtuwCqTK+0UfaTrKcVHzuN4YkHLnH3Yn7FkxknKXtw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 09:06:47 +0800 huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> >> +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?
> >>
> >> struct swap_info_struct pointed to by swap_info[] will never be freed.
> >> During swapoff, we only free the memory pointed to by the fields of
> >> struct swap_info_struct.  And when swapon, we will always reuse
> >> swap_info[type] if it's not NULL.  So it should be safe to dereference
> >> swap_info[type] with preemption enabled.
> >
> > That's my point.  If there's a race window during which there is a
> > parallel swapoff+swapon, this swap_info_struct may now be in use for a
> > different device?
> 
> Yes.  It's possible.  And the caller of get_swap_device() can live
> with it if the swap_info_struct has been fully initialized.  For
> example, for the race in the patch description,
> 
> do_swap_page
>   swapin_readahead
>     __read_swap_cache_async
>       swapcache_prepare
>         __swap_duplicate
> 
> in __swap_duplicate(), it's possible that the swap device returned by
> get_swap_device() is different from the swap device when
> __swap_duplicate() call get_swap_device().  But the struct_info_struct
> has been fully initialized, so __swap_duplicate() can reference
> si->swap_map[] safely.  And we will check si->swap_map[] before any
> further operation.  Even if the swap entry is swapped out again for
> the new swap device, we will check the page table again in
> do_swap_page().  So there is no functionality problem.

That's rather revolting.  Can we tighten this up?  Or at least very
loudly document it?