Re: panic: lockmgr still held [tmpfs] [vm_map_remove()->vdropl()

on 04/03/2014 18:45 John Baldwin said the following:
> So I'm not sure how to fix this.  The crash is in this code in 
> vm_object_deallocate():
> 
> 			if (object->type == OBJT_SWAP &&
> 			    (object->flags & OBJ_TMPFS) != 0) {
> 				vp = object->un_pager.swp.swp_tmpfs;
> 				vhold(vp);
> 				VM_OBJECT_WUNLOCK(object);
> 				vn_lock(vp, LK_EXCLUSIVE | LK_RETRY);
> 				vdrop(vp);
> 				VM_OBJECT_WLOCK(object);
> 				if (object->type == OBJT_DEAD ||
> 				    object->ref_count != 1) {
> 					VM_OBJECT_WUNLOCK(object);
> 					VOP_UNLOCK(vp, 0);
> 					return;
> 				}
> 				if ((object->flags & OBJ_TMPFS) != 0)
> 					VOP_UNSET_TEXT(vp);
> 				VOP_UNLOCK(vp, 0);
> 			}
> 
> The vdrop() is dropping the count to zero and trying to free the vnode.  The 
> real problem I think is that swp_tmpfs doesn't have an implicit vhold() on the 
> vnode, so in this case, the code is doing a vhold/vn_lock/vdrop of an already-
> free vnode.  For OBJT_VNODE objects, the reference from the object back to the 
> vnode holds a vref() that gets released by a vput() in 
> vm_object_vndeallocate().
> 
> One fix might be to chagne smp_tmpfs to hold a vhold reference.  This is 
> untested but might work (but I'm also not sure that this is the right thing in 
> that I don't know what other effects it might have).

I agree with your analysis, but I don't think that a filesystem holding its own
vnode is a good idea.  If I am not mistaken, that would prevent tmpfs vnodes
from going to free list.
I'd rather try to modify vm_object_deallocate() code.  E.g. vdrop() could be
called after VOP_UNLOCK().  Alternatively, the code could handle a doomed vnode
in a different way.

-- 
Andriy Gapon
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"