mm: swapoff: shmem_unuse() stop eviction without igrab()
The igrab() in shmem_unuse() looks good, but we forgot that it gives no protection against concurrent unmounting: a point made by Konstantin Khlebnikov eight years ago, and then fixed in 2.6.39 by 778dd893 ("tmpfs: fix race between umount and swapoff"). The current 5.1-rc swapoff is liable to hit "VFS: Busy inodes after unmount of tmpfs. Self-destruct in 5 seconds. Have a nice day..." followed by GPF. Once again, give up on using igrab(); but don't go back to making such heavy-handed use of shmem_swaplist_mutex as last time: that would spoil the new design, and I expect could deadlock inside shmem_swapin_page(). Instead, shmem_unuse() just raise a "stop_eviction" count in the shmem- specific inode, and shmem_evict_inode() wait for that to go down to 0. Call it "stop_eviction" rather than "swapoff_busy" because it can be put to use for others later (huge tmpfs patches expect to use it). That simplifies shmem_unuse(), protecting it from both unlink and unmount; and in practice lets it locate all the swap in its first try. But do not rely on that: there's still a theoretical case, when shmem_writepage() might have been preempted after its get_swap_page(), before making the swap entry visible to swapoff. [hughd@google.com: remove incorrect list_del()] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.LSU.2.11.1904091133570.1898@eggly.anvils Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.LSU.2.11.1904081259400.1523@eggly.anvils Fixes: b56a2d8a ("mm: rid swapoff of quadratic complexity") Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: "Alex Xu (Hello71)" <alex_y_xu@yahoo.ca> Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Kelley Nielsen <kelleynnn@gmail.com> Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com> Cc: Vineeth Pillai <vpillai@digitalocean.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment