On 05/24/2011 12:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-05-24 11:58, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> On 05/24/2011 11:36 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> On 2011-05-24 11:32, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>>> On 05/24/2011 11:13 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>> On 2011-05-24 06:31, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/23/2011 03:53 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>>> The following changes since commit
>>>>>>> aec30a2543afa18fa7832deee85e187b0faeb1f0:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> xeno-test: fix reference to @XENO_TEST_DIR@ (2011-05-15 21:20:41
>>>>>>> +0200)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>>>>> git://git.xenomai.org/xenomai-jki.git for-upstream
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jan Kiszka (1):
>>>>>>> native: Fix msendq fastlock leakage
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> include/native/task.h | 5 +++++
>>>>>>> ksrc/skins/native/task.c | 13 ++++++-------
>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------8<------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When a native task terminates without going through rt_task_delete, we
>>>>>>> leaked the fastlock so far. Fix it by moving the release into the delete
>>>>>>> hook. As the ppd is already invalid at that point, we have to save the
>>>>>>> heap address in the task data structure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I Jan, I once worked on a patch to reverse the ppd cleanup order, in
>>>>>> order
>>>>>> to fix bugs of this kind. Here it comes. I do not remember why I did not
>>>>>> commit it, but I guess it was not working well. Could we restart working
>>>>>> from this patch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From 038ecf08cd66b3112e0fe277d71d294b8eb83bcc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>>>>> From: Gilles Chanteperdrix <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 14:52:08 +0200
>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] nucleus: reverse ppd cleanup order
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c | 11 ++++++-----
>>>>>> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c b/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c
>>>>>> index b2d4326..725ae43 100644
>>>>>> --- a/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c
>>>>>> +++ b/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c
>>>>>> @@ -556,7 +556,7 @@ static unsigned ppd_lookup_inner(xnqueue_t **pq,
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> while (holder &&
>>>>>> (ppd->key.mm < pkey->mm ||
>>>>>> - (ppd->key.mm == pkey->mm && ppd->key.muxid <
>>>>>> pkey->muxid)));
>>>>>> + (ppd->key.mm == pkey->mm && ppd->key.muxid >
>>>>>> pkey->muxid)));
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (ppd->key.mm == pkey->mm && ppd->key.muxid == pkey->muxid) {
>>>>>> /* found it, return it. */
>>>>>> @@ -566,7 +566,7 @@ static unsigned ppd_lookup_inner(xnqueue_t **pq,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* not found, return successor for insertion. */
>>>>>> if (ppd->key.mm < pkey->mm ||
>>>>>> - (ppd->key.mm == pkey->mm && ppd->key.muxid < pkey->muxid))
>>>>>> + (ppd->key.mm == pkey->mm && ppd->key.muxid > pkey->muxid))
>>>>>> *pholder = holder ? link2ppd(holder) : NULL;
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> *pholder = ppd;
>>>>>> @@ -589,10 +589,11 @@ static int ppd_insert(xnshadow_ppd_t * holder)
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> inith(&holder->link);
>>>>>> - if (next)
>>>>>> + if (next) {
>>>>>> insertq(q, &next->link, &holder->link);
>>>>>> - else
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> appendq(q, &holder->link);
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> xnlock_put_irqrestore(&nklock, s);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>> @@ -640,7 +641,7 @@ static inline void ppd_remove_mm(struct mm_struct
>>>>>> *mm,
>>>>>> xnqueue_t *q;
>>>>>> spl_t s;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - key.muxid = 0;
>>>>>> + key.muxid = ~0UL;
>>>>>> key.mm = mm;
>>>>>> xnlock_get_irqsave(&nklock, s);
>>>>>> ppd_lookup_inner(&q, &ppd, &key);
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, that won't help. I think we are forced to clear
>>>>> xnshadow_thrptd before calling into xnpod_delete_thread, but we would
>>>>> need that for xnshadow_ppd_get (=>xnpod_userspace_p()).
>>>>
>>>> I remember that now. Even if it worked, when the cleanup handler is
>>>> called, current->mm is NULL. We need to do this differently, the sys ppd
>>>> should be treated differently and passed to the other ppds cleanup
>>>> routines.
>>>
>>> Do you already have an idea how to get that info to the delete hook
>>> function?
>>
>> Yes. We start by not applying the list reversal patch, then the sys_ppd
>> is the first in the list. So, we can, in the function ppd_remove_mm,
>> start by removing all the others ppd, then remove the sys ppd (that is
>> the first), last. This changes a few signatures in the core code, a lot
>> of things in the skin code, but that would be for the better...
>
> I still don't see how this affects the order we use in
> do_taskexit_event, the one that prevents xnsys_get_ppd usage even when
> the mm is still present.
The idea is to change the cleanup routines not to call xnsys_get_ppd.
--
Gilles.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
