From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBB386B0072 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:00:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:00:42 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [PATCH] mremap: enforce rmap src/dst vma ordering in case of vma_merge succeeding in copy_vma Message-ID: <20111116140042.GD3306@redhat.com> References: <1320082040-1190-1-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> <20111104235603.GT18879@redhat.com> <20111105013317.GU18879@redhat.com> <20111107131413.GA18279@suse.de> <20111107154235.GE3249@redhat.com> <20111107162808.GA3083@suse.de> <20111109012542.GC5075@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111109012542.GC5075@redhat.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Nai Xia , Hugh Dickins , Pawel Sikora , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com, arekm@pld-linux.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 02:25:42AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Also note, if we find a way to enforce orderings in the prio tree (not > sure if it's possible, apparently it's already using list_add_tail > so..), then we could also remove the i_mmap_lock from mremap and fork. I'm not optimistic we can enforce ordering there. Being a tree it's walked in range order. I thought of another solution that would avoid having to reorder the list in mremap and avoid the i_mmap_mutex to be added to fork (and then we can remove it from mremap too). The solution is to rmap_walk twice. I mean two loops over the same_anon_vma for those rmap walks that must be reliable (that includes two calls of unmap_mapping_range). For both same_anon_vma and prio tree. Reading truncate_pagecache I see two loops already and a comment saying it's for fork(), to avoid leaking ptes in the child. So fork is probably ok already without having to take the i_mmap_mutex, but then I wonder why that also doesn't fix mremap if we do two loops there and why that i_mmap_mutex is really needed in mremap considering those two calls already present in truncate_pagecache. I wonder if that was a "theoretical" fix that missed the fact truncate already walks the prio tree twice, so it doesn't matter if the rmap_walk goes in the opposite direction of move_page_tables? That i_mmap_lock in mremap (now i_mmap_mutex) is there since start of git history. The double loop was introduced in d00806b183152af6d24f46f0c33f14162ca1262a. So it's very possible that i_mmap_mutex is now useless (after d00806b183152af6d24f46f0c33f14162ca1262a) and the fix for fork, was already taking care of mremap too and that i_mmap_mutex can now be removed. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org