From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: rcu-protected get_mm_exe_file()
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:07:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150316140720.GA1859@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150316131257.32340.36600.stgit@buzz>
On 03/16, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>
> +/**
> + * set_mm_exe_file - change a reference to the mm's executable file
> + *
> + * This changes mm's executale file (shown as symlink /proc/[pid]/exe).
> + *
> + * Main users are mmput(), sys_execve() and sys_prctl(PR_SET_MM_MAP/EXE_FILE).
> + * Callers prevent concurrent invocations: in mmput() nobody alive left,
> + * in execve task is single-threaded, prctl holds mmap_sem exclusively.
> + */
> void set_mm_exe_file(struct mm_struct *mm, struct file *new_exe_file)
> {
> + struct file *old_exe_file = rcu_dereference_protected(mm->exe_file,
> + !atomic_read(&mm->mm_users) || current->in_execve ||
> + lock_is_held(&mm->mmap_sem));
> +
> if (new_exe_file)
> get_file(new_exe_file);
> - if (mm->exe_file)
> - fput(mm->exe_file);
> - mm->exe_file = new_exe_file;
> + rcu_assign_pointer(mm->exe_file, new_exe_file);
> + if (old_exe_file)
> + fput(old_exe_file);
> }
Yes, I think this is correct, __fput() does call_rcu(file_free_rcu). And
much better than the new lock ;)
Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
So I think the patch is fine, but personally I dislike the "prctl holds
mmap_sem exclusively" and rcu_dereference_protected().
I mean, I think we can do another cleanup on top of this change.
1. set_mm_exe_file() should be called by exit/exec only, so
it should use
rcu_dereference_protected(mm->exe_file,
atomic_read(&mm->mm_users) <= 1);
2. prctl() should not use it, it can do
get_file(new_exe);
old_exe = xchg(&mm->exe_file);
if (old_exe)
fput(old_exe);
3. and we can remove down_write(mmap_sem) from prctl paths.
Actually we can do this even without xchg() above, but we might
want to kill MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED and test_and_set_bit() check.
What do you think?
Oleg.
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: rcu-protected get_mm_exe_file()
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:07:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150316140720.GA1859@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150316131257.32340.36600.stgit@buzz>
On 03/16, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>
> +/**
> + * set_mm_exe_file - change a reference to the mm's executable file
> + *
> + * This changes mm's executale file (shown as symlink /proc/[pid]/exe).
> + *
> + * Main users are mmput(), sys_execve() and sys_prctl(PR_SET_MM_MAP/EXE_FILE).
> + * Callers prevent concurrent invocations: in mmput() nobody alive left,
> + * in execve task is single-threaded, prctl holds mmap_sem exclusively.
> + */
> void set_mm_exe_file(struct mm_struct *mm, struct file *new_exe_file)
> {
> + struct file *old_exe_file = rcu_dereference_protected(mm->exe_file,
> + !atomic_read(&mm->mm_users) || current->in_execve ||
> + lock_is_held(&mm->mmap_sem));
> +
> if (new_exe_file)
> get_file(new_exe_file);
> - if (mm->exe_file)
> - fput(mm->exe_file);
> - mm->exe_file = new_exe_file;
> + rcu_assign_pointer(mm->exe_file, new_exe_file);
> + if (old_exe_file)
> + fput(old_exe_file);
> }
Yes, I think this is correct, __fput() does call_rcu(file_free_rcu). And
much better than the new lock ;)
Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
So I think the patch is fine, but personally I dislike the "prctl holds
mmap_sem exclusively" and rcu_dereference_protected().
I mean, I think we can do another cleanup on top of this change.
1. set_mm_exe_file() should be called by exit/exec only, so
it should use
rcu_dereference_protected(mm->exe_file,
atomic_read(&mm->mm_users) <= 1);
2. prctl() should not use it, it can do
get_file(new_exe);
old_exe = xchg(&mm->exe_file);
if (old_exe)
fput(old_exe);
3. and we can remove down_write(mmap_sem) from prctl paths.
Actually we can do this even without xchg() above, but we might
want to kill MMF_EXE_FILE_CHANGED and test_and_set_bit() check.
What do you think?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-16 14:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-16 13:12 [PATCH] mm: rcu-protected get_mm_exe_file() Konstantin Khlebnikov
2015-03-16 13:12 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2015-03-16 14:07 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2015-03-16 14:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-03-16 14:50 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-03-16 14:50 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-03-16 16:18 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2015-03-16 16:18 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2015-03-16 17:04 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-03-16 17:04 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-03-16 16:15 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2015-03-16 16:15 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2015-03-16 16:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-03-16 16:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20150316140720.GA1859@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.