From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exit: clear TIF_MEMDIE after exit_task_work
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 18:14:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160301181136-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160301160813.GM9461@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:08:13PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 01-03-16 17:57:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:52:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [CCing vhost-net maintainer]
> > >
> > > On Mon 29-02-16 20:02:09, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > > An mm_struct may be pinned by a file. An example is vhost-net device
> > > > created by a qemu/kvm (see vhost_net_ioctl -> vhost_net_set_owner ->
> > > > vhost_dev_set_owner).
> > >
> > > The more I think about that the more I am wondering whether this is
> > > actually OK and correct. Why does the driver have to pin the address
> > > space? Nothing really prevents from parallel tearing down of the address
> > > space anyway so the code cannot expect all the vmas to stay. Would it be
> > > enough to pin the mm_struct only?
> >
> > I'll need to research this. It's a fact that as long as the
> > device is not stopped, vhost can attempt to access
> > the address space.
>
> But does it expect any specific parts of the address space to be mapped?
> E.g. proc needs to keep the mm allocated as well for some files but it
> doesn't pin the address space (mm_users) but rather mm_count (see
> proc_mem_open).
As I said, I need to research this.
> > > I am not sure I understand the code properly but what prevents from
> > > the situation when a VHOST_SET_OWNER caller dies without calling
> > > VHOST_RESET_OWNER and so the mm would be pinned indefinitely?
> > >
> > > [Keeping the reset of the email for reference]
> >
> > We have:
> >
> > static const struct file_operations vhost_net_fops = {
> > .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > .release = vhost_net_release,
> > ...
> > };
> >
> > When caller dies and after fds are closed,
> > vhost_net_release calls vhost_dev_cleanup and that
> > drops the mm reference.
>
> Can another process have the device open as well and prevent from
> destruction?
Yes.
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
--
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: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exit: clear TIF_MEMDIE after exit_task_work
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 18:14:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160301181136-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160301160813.GM9461@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:08:13PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 01-03-16 17:57:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:52:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [CCing vhost-net maintainer]
> > >
> > > On Mon 29-02-16 20:02:09, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > > An mm_struct may be pinned by a file. An example is vhost-net device
> > > > created by a qemu/kvm (see vhost_net_ioctl -> vhost_net_set_owner ->
> > > > vhost_dev_set_owner).
> > >
> > > The more I think about that the more I am wondering whether this is
> > > actually OK and correct. Why does the driver have to pin the address
> > > space? Nothing really prevents from parallel tearing down of the address
> > > space anyway so the code cannot expect all the vmas to stay. Would it be
> > > enough to pin the mm_struct only?
> >
> > I'll need to research this. It's a fact that as long as the
> > device is not stopped, vhost can attempt to access
> > the address space.
>
> But does it expect any specific parts of the address space to be mapped?
> E.g. proc needs to keep the mm allocated as well for some files but it
> doesn't pin the address space (mm_users) but rather mm_count (see
> proc_mem_open).
As I said, I need to research this.
> > > I am not sure I understand the code properly but what prevents from
> > > the situation when a VHOST_SET_OWNER caller dies without calling
> > > VHOST_RESET_OWNER and so the mm would be pinned indefinitely?
> > >
> > > [Keeping the reset of the email for reference]
> >
> > We have:
> >
> > static const struct file_operations vhost_net_fops = {
> > .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > .release = vhost_net_release,
> > ...
> > };
> >
> > When caller dies and after fds are closed,
> > vhost_net_release calls vhost_dev_cleanup and that
> > drops the mm reference.
>
> Can another process have the device open as well and prevent from
> destruction?
Yes.
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-01 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-29 17:02 [PATCH] exit: clear TIF_MEMDIE after exit_task_work Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-29 17:02 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-29 18:21 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-29 18:21 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-29 18:44 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-29 18:44 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 15:52 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 15:52 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 15:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 15:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 16:08 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 16:08 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 16:14 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2016-03-01 16:14 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 16:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 16:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 16:35 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 16:35 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 16:46 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 16:46 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 17:17 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 17:17 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-01 17:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01 17:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-14 16:39 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-14 16:39 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-07 12:50 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-07 12:50 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-13 11:50 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-13 11:50 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-13 13:52 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-06-13 13:52 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-06-13 14:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-13 14:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-13 18:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-06-13 18:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20160301181136-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vdavydov@virtuozzo.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.