From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: prevent mmap_cache race in find_vma()
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 00:14:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130403041447.GC4611@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304021643260.3217@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 04:55:45PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> > > > find_vma() can be called by multiple threads with read lock
> > > > held on mm->mmap_sem and any of them can update mm->mmap_cache.
> > > > Prevent compiler from re-fetching mm->mmap_cache, because other
> > > > readers could update it in the meantime:
> > >
> > > FWIW, ACCESS_ONCE() does not guarantee that the compiler will not refetch
> > > mm->mmap_cache whatsoever; there is nothing that prevents this either in
> > > the C standard. You'll be relying solely on gcc's implementation of how
> > > it dereferences volatile-qualified pointers.
> >
> > Jan is using ACCESS_ONCE() as it should be used, for its intended
> > purpose. If the kernel's implementation of ACCESS_ONCE() is deficient,
> > then we should fix that, not discourage its use.
> >
>
> My comment is about the changelog, quoted above, saying "prevent compiler
> from re-fetching mm->mmap_cache..." ACCESS_ONCE(), as implemented, does
> not prevent the compiler from re-fetching anything. It is entirely
> plausible that in gcc's current implementation that this guarantee is
> made, but it is not prevented by the language standard and I think the
> changelog should be reworded for anybody who reads it in the future.
> There is a dependency here on gcc's implementation, it's a meaningful
> distinction.
The definition of ACCESS_ONCE() relies on gcc's current
implementation, the users of ACCESS_ONCE() only rely on ACCESS_ONCE()
being defined.
Should it ever break you have to either fix it at the implementation
level or remove/replace the abstraction in its entirety, how does the
individual callsite matter in this case?
--
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:[~2013-04-03 4:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-02 21:59 [PATCH] mm: prevent mmap_cache race in find_vma() Jan Stancek
2013-04-02 22:33 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-02 23:09 ` Hugh Dickins
2013-04-02 23:55 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-03 3:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-03 4:21 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-03 16:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-03 4:14 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2013-04-03 4:25 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-03 4:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-04-03 5:13 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-03 13:45 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2013-04-03 14:33 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-04-03 23:59 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-04 0:00 ` [patch] compiler: clarify ACCESS_ONCE() relies on compiler implementation David Rientjes
2013-04-04 0:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 1:52 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-04 2:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 2:18 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-04 2:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 6:02 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-04 14:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 19:40 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-04 19:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 20:02 ` David Rientjes
2013-04-03 16:33 ` [PATCH] mm: prevent mmap_cache race in find_vma() Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-03 16:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-03 17:47 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2013-04-03 22:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-03 22:28 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2013-04-12 18:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-03 9:37 ` Jakub Jelinek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-04-04 18:35 Hugh Dickins
2013-04-04 18:35 ` Hugh Dickins
2013-04-04 18:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 18:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 19:01 ` Hugh Dickins
2013-04-04 19:01 ` Hugh Dickins
2013-04-04 19:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 19:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-04-04 22:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-04 22:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20130403041447.GC4611@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=iant@google.com \
--cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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.