From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 9/9] mm: fix pagecache write deadlocks
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 03:15:49 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070204031549.203f7b47.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070204110317.GA9034@wotan.suse.de>
On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 12:03:17 +0100 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 02:56:02AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:46:09 +0100 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 02:30:55AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:15:29 +0100 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The write path is broken. I prefer my kernels slow, than buggy.
> > > >
> > > > That won't fly.
> > >
> > > What won't fly?
> >
> > I suspect the performance cost of this approach would force us to redo it
> > all.
>
> That's the idea. But at least in the meantime we're correct.
There's no way I'd support merging a change which we know we'll have to
redo only we have no clue how.
> > If that recollection is right, I think we could afford to reintroduce that
> > problem, frankly. Especially as it only happens in the incredibly rare
> > case of that get_user()ed page getting unmapped under our feet.
>
> Dang. I was hoping to fix it without introducing data corruption.
Well. It's a compromise. Being practical about it, I reeeealy doubt that
anyone will hit this combination of circumstances.
> > > > > but you introduce the theoretical memory deadlock
> > > > > where a task cannot reclaim its own memory.
> > > >
> > > > Nah, that'll never happen - both pages are already allocated.
> > >
> > > Both pages? I don't get it.
> > >
> > > You set the don't-reclaim vma flag, then run get_user, which takes a
> > > page fault and potentially has to allocate N pages for pagetables,
> > > pagecache readahead, buffers and fs private data and pagecache radix
> > > tree nodes for all of the pages read in.
> >
> > Oh, OK. Need to do the get_user() twice then. Once before taking that new
> > rwsem.
>
> Race condition remains.
No, not in a million years.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 9/9] mm: fix pagecache write deadlocks
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 03:15:49 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070204031549.203f7b47.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070204110317.GA9034@wotan.suse.de>
On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 12:03:17 +0100 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 02:56:02AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:46:09 +0100 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 02:30:55AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:15:29 +0100 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The write path is broken. I prefer my kernels slow, than buggy.
> > > >
> > > > That won't fly.
> > >
> > > What won't fly?
> >
> > I suspect the performance cost of this approach would force us to redo it
> > all.
>
> That's the idea. But at least in the meantime we're correct.
There's no way I'd support merging a change which we know we'll have to
redo only we have no clue how.
> > If that recollection is right, I think we could afford to reintroduce that
> > problem, frankly. Especially as it only happens in the incredibly rare
> > case of that get_user()ed page getting unmapped under our feet.
>
> Dang. I was hoping to fix it without introducing data corruption.
Well. It's a compromise. Being practical about it, I reeeealy doubt that
anyone will hit this combination of circumstances.
> > > > > but you introduce the theoretical memory deadlock
> > > > > where a task cannot reclaim its own memory.
> > > >
> > > > Nah, that'll never happen - both pages are already allocated.
> > >
> > > Both pages? I don't get it.
> > >
> > > You set the don't-reclaim vma flag, then run get_user, which takes a
> > > page fault and potentially has to allocate N pages for pagetables,
> > > pagecache readahead, buffers and fs private data and pagecache radix
> > > tree nodes for all of the pages read in.
> >
> > Oh, OK. Need to do the get_user() twice then. Once before taking that new
> > rwsem.
>
> Race condition remains.
No, not in a million years.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-04 11:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-04 8:49 [patch 0/9] buffered write deadlock fix Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:49 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:49 ` [patch 1/9] fs: libfs buffered write leak fix Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:49 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` [patch 2/9] mm: revert "generic_file_buffered_write(): handle zero length iovec segments" Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` Nick Piggin, Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 8:50 ` [patch 3/9] mm: revert "generic_file_buffered_write(): deadlock on vectored write" Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` Nick Piggin, Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 8:50 ` [patch 4/9] mm: generic_file_buffered_write cleanup Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` Nick Piggin, Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 8:50 ` [patch 5/9] mm: debug write deadlocks Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` [patch 6/9] mm: be sure to trim blocks Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` [patch 7/9] mm: cleanup pagecache insertion operations Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` [patch 8/9] mm: generic_file_buffered_write iovec cleanup Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:51 ` [patch 9/9] mm: fix pagecache write deadlocks Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 8:51 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 9:44 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 9:44 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 10:15 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 10:15 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 10:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-02-04 10:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-02-04 10:30 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 10:30 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 10:46 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 10:46 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 10:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 10:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 10:56 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 10:56 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 11:03 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 11:03 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 11:15 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2007-02-04 11:15 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 15:10 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 15:10 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 18:36 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 18:36 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-06 2:25 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 2:25 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 4:41 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 4:41 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 5:30 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-06 5:30 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-06 5:49 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 5:49 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 5:53 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 5:53 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 10:59 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2007-02-04 10:59 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2007-02-04 11:10 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 11:10 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-04 11:22 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 11:22 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-04 17:40 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2007-02-04 17:40 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2007-02-06 2:09 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 2:09 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-06 13:13 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2007-02-06 13:13 ` Anton Altaparmakov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-01-29 10:31 [patch 0/9] buffered write deadlock fix Nick Piggin
2007-01-29 10:33 ` [patch 9/9] mm: fix pagecache write deadlocks Nick Piggin
2007-01-29 10:33 ` Nick Piggin
2007-01-29 11:11 ` Nick Piggin
2007-01-29 11:11 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-02 23:53 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-02 23:53 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-03 1:38 ` Nick Piggin
2007-02-03 1:38 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070204031549.203f7b47.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.