From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f169.google.com (mail-qk0-f169.google.com [209.85.220.169]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CC46B0038 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2015 06:50:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by qkei195 with SMTP id i195so159669662qke.3 for ; Wed, 08 Jul 2015 03:50:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com. [209.132.183.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r76si2158676qha.128.2015.07.08.03.50.12 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Jul 2015 03:50:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: [PATCH 4/5] userfaultfd: avoid missing wakeups during refile in userfaultfd_read Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 12:50:07 +0200 Message-Id: <1436352608-8455-5-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1436352608-8455-1-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> References: <1436352608-8455-1-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Pavel Emelyanov , Dave Hansen During the refile in userfaultfd_read both waitqueues could look empty to the lockless wake_userfault(). Use a seqcount to prevent this false negative that could leave an userfault blocked. Signed-off-by: Andrea Arcangeli --- fs/userfaultfd.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/userfaultfd.c b/fs/userfaultfd.c index 851d575..6a117f8 100644 --- a/fs/userfaultfd.c +++ b/fs/userfaultfd.c @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ struct userfaultfd_ctx { wait_queue_head_t fault_wqh; /* waitqueue head for the pseudo fd to wakeup poll/read */ wait_queue_head_t fd_wqh; + /* a refile sequence protected by fault_pending_wqh lock */ + struct seqcount refile_seq; /* pseudo fd refcounting */ atomic_t refcount; /* userfaultfd syscall flags */ @@ -547,6 +549,15 @@ static ssize_t userfaultfd_ctx_read(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, int no_wait, uwq = find_userfault(ctx); if (uwq) { /* + * Use a seqcount to repeat the lockless check + * in wake_userfault() to avoid missing + * wakeups because during the refile both + * waitqueue could become empty if this is the + * only userfault. + */ + write_seqcount_begin(&ctx->refile_seq); + + /* * The fault_pending_wqh.lock prevents the uwq * to disappear from under us. * @@ -570,6 +581,8 @@ static ssize_t userfaultfd_ctx_read(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, int no_wait, list_del(&uwq->wq.task_list); __add_wait_queue(&ctx->fault_wqh, &uwq->wq); + write_seqcount_end(&ctx->refile_seq); + /* careful to always initialize msg if ret == 0 */ *msg = uwq->msg; spin_unlock(&ctx->fault_pending_wqh.lock); @@ -647,6 +660,9 @@ static void __wake_userfault(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, static __always_inline void wake_userfault(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, struct userfaultfd_wake_range *range) { + unsigned seq; + bool need_wakeup; + /* * To be sure waitqueue_active() is not reordered by the CPU * before the pagetable update, use an explicit SMP memory @@ -662,8 +678,13 @@ static __always_inline void wake_userfault(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, * userfaults yet. So we take the spinlock only when we're * sure we've userfaults to wake. */ - if (waitqueue_active(&ctx->fault_pending_wqh) || - waitqueue_active(&ctx->fault_wqh)) + do { + seq = read_seqcount_begin(&ctx->refile_seq); + need_wakeup = waitqueue_active(&ctx->fault_pending_wqh) || + waitqueue_active(&ctx->fault_wqh); + cond_resched(); + } while (read_seqcount_retry(&ctx->refile_seq, seq)); + if (need_wakeup) __wake_userfault(ctx, range); } @@ -1219,6 +1240,7 @@ static void init_once_userfaultfd_ctx(void *mem) init_waitqueue_head(&ctx->fault_pending_wqh); init_waitqueue_head(&ctx->fault_wqh); init_waitqueue_head(&ctx->fd_wqh); + seqcount_init(&ctx->refile_seq); } /** -- 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: email@kvack.org