Re: [BUG REPORT] ZSWAP: theoretical race condition issues

[Weijie Yang]

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Bob Liu <lliubbo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Weijie Yang <weijie.yang.kh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I think I find a new issue, for integrity of this mail thread, I reply
>> to this mail.
>>
>> It is a concurrence issue either, when duplicate store and reclaim
>> concurrentlly.
>>
>> zswap entry x with offset A is already stored in zswap backend.
>> Consider the following scenario:
>>
>> thread 0: reclaim entry x (get refcount, but not call zswap_get_swap_cache_page)
>>
>> thread 1: store new page with the same offset A, alloc a new zswap entry y.
>>   store finished. shrink_page_list() call __remove_mapping(), and now
>> it is not in swap_cache
>>
>
> But I don't think swap layer will call zswap with the same offset A.

1. store page of offset A in zswap
2. some time later, pagefault occur, load page data from zswap.
  But notice that zswap entry x is still in zswap because it is not
frontswap_tmem_exclusive_gets_enabled.
 this page is with PageSwapCache(page) and page_private(page) = entry.val
3. change this page data, and it become dirty
4. some time later again, swap this page on the same offset A.

so, a duplicate store happens.

what I can think is that use flags and CAS to protect store and reclaim on
the same offset  happens concurrentlly.

>> thread 0: zswap_get_swap_cache_page called. old page data is added to swap_cache
>>
>> Now, swap cache has old data rather than new data for offset A.
>> error will happen If do_swap_page() get page from swap_cache.
>>
>
> --
> Regards,
> --Bob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/