[PATCH v3 0/3] execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma lock

[PATCH v3 0/3] execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma lock

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

With /proc/pid/maps now being read under per-vma lock protection we can
reuse parts of that code to execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl also without
taking mmap_lock. The change is designed to reduce mmap_lock contention
and prevent PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl calls from blocking address space updates.

This patchset was split out of the original patchset [1] that introduced
per-vma lock usage for /proc/pid/maps reading. It contains PROCMAP_QUERY
tests, code refactoring patch to simplify the main change and the actual
transition to per-vma lock.

Changes since v2 [2]
- Added Reviewed-by, per Vlastimil Babka
- Fixed query_vma_find_by_addr() to handle lock_ctx->mmap_locked case,
per Vlastimil Babka

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250704060727.724817-1-surenb@google.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250804231552.1217132-1-surenb@google.com/

Suren Baghdasaryan (3):
  selftests/proc: test PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl while vma is concurrently
    modified
  fs/proc/task_mmu: factor out proc_maps_private fields used by
    PROCMAP_QUERY
  fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma locks

 fs/proc/internal.h                            |  15 +-
 fs/proc/task_mmu.c                            | 152 ++++++++++++------
 fs/proc/task_nommu.c                          |  14 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-maps-race.c |  65 ++++++++
 4 files changed, 184 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)


base-commit: 8e7e0c6d09502e44aa7a8fce0821e042a6ec03d1
-- 
2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog

[PATCH v3 1/3] selftests/proc: test PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl while vma is concurrently modified

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

Extend /proc/pid/maps tearing tests to verify PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl operation
correctness while the vma is being concurrently modified.

Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Tested-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-maps-race.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-maps-race.c b/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-maps-race.c
index 94bba4553130..a546475db550 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-maps-race.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-maps-race.c
@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@
 #include <stdlib.h>
 #include <string.h>
 #include <unistd.h>
+#include <linux/fs.h>
+#include <sys/ioctl.h>
 #include <sys/mman.h>
 #include <sys/stat.h>
 #include <sys/types.h>
@@ -317,6 +319,25 @@ static bool capture_mod_pattern(FIXTURE_DATA(proc_maps_race) *self,
 	       strcmp(restored_first_line->text, self->first_line.text) == 0;
 }
 
+static bool query_addr_at(int maps_fd, void *addr,
+			  unsigned long *vma_start, unsigned long *vma_end)
+{
+	struct procmap_query q;
+
+	memset(&q, 0, sizeof(q));
+	q.size = sizeof(q);
+	/* Find the VMA at the split address */
+	q.query_addr = (unsigned long long)addr;
+	q.query_flags = 0;
+	if (ioctl(maps_fd, PROCMAP_QUERY, &q))
+		return false;
+
+	*vma_start = q.vma_start;
+	*vma_end = q.vma_end;
+
+	return true;
+}
+
 static inline bool split_vma(FIXTURE_DATA(proc_maps_race) *self)
 {
 	return mmap(self->mod_info->addr, self->page_size, self->mod_info->prot | PROT_EXEC,
@@ -559,6 +580,8 @@ TEST_F(proc_maps_race, test_maps_tearing_from_split)
 	do {
 		bool last_line_changed;
 		bool first_line_changed;
+		unsigned long vma_start;
+		unsigned long vma_end;
 
 		ASSERT_TRUE(read_boundary_lines(self, &new_last_line, &new_first_line));
 
@@ -595,6 +618,19 @@ TEST_F(proc_maps_race, test_maps_tearing_from_split)
 		first_line_changed = strcmp(new_first_line.text, self->first_line.text) != 0;
 		ASSERT_EQ(last_line_changed, first_line_changed);
 
+		/* Check if PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt() finds the right VMA */
+		ASSERT_TRUE(query_addr_at(self->maps_fd, mod_info->addr + self->page_size,
+					  &vma_start, &vma_end));
+		/*
+		 * The vma at the split address can be either the same as
+		 * original one (if read before the split) or the same as the
+		 * first line in the second page (if read after the split).
+		 */
+		ASSERT_TRUE((vma_start == self->last_line.start_addr &&
+			     vma_end == self->last_line.end_addr) ||
+			    (vma_start == split_first_line.start_addr &&
+			     vma_end == split_first_line.end_addr));
+
 		clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE, &end_ts);
 		end_test_iteration(&end_ts, self->verbose);
 	} while (end_ts.tv_sec - start_ts.tv_sec < self->duration_sec);
@@ -636,6 +672,9 @@ TEST_F(proc_maps_race, test_maps_tearing_from_resize)
 	clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE, &start_ts);
 	start_test_loop(&start_ts, self->verbose);
 	do {
+		unsigned long vma_start;
+		unsigned long vma_end;
+
 		ASSERT_TRUE(read_boundary_lines(self, &new_last_line, &new_first_line));
 
 		/* Check if we read vmas after shrinking it */
@@ -662,6 +701,16 @@ TEST_F(proc_maps_race, test_maps_tearing_from_resize)
 					"Expand result invalid", self));
 		}
 
+		/* Check if PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt() finds the right VMA */
+		ASSERT_TRUE(query_addr_at(self->maps_fd, mod_info->addr, &vma_start, &vma_end));
+		/*
+		 * The vma should stay at the same address and have either the
+		 * original size of 3 pages or 1 page if read after shrinking.
+		 */
+		ASSERT_TRUE(vma_start == self->last_line.start_addr &&
+			    (vma_end - vma_start == self->page_size * 3 ||
+			     vma_end - vma_start == self->page_size));
+
 		clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE, &end_ts);
 		end_test_iteration(&end_ts, self->verbose);
 	} while (end_ts.tv_sec - start_ts.tv_sec < self->duration_sec);
@@ -703,6 +752,9 @@ TEST_F(proc_maps_race, test_maps_tearing_from_remap)
 	clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE, &start_ts);
 	start_test_loop(&start_ts, self->verbose);
 	do {
+		unsigned long vma_start;
+		unsigned long vma_end;
+
 		ASSERT_TRUE(read_boundary_lines(self, &new_last_line, &new_first_line));
 
 		/* Check if we read vmas after remapping it */
@@ -729,6 +781,19 @@ TEST_F(proc_maps_race, test_maps_tearing_from_remap)
 					"Remap restore result invalid", self));
 		}
 
+		/* Check if PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt() finds the right VMA */
+		ASSERT_TRUE(query_addr_at(self->maps_fd, mod_info->addr + self->page_size,
+					  &vma_start, &vma_end));
+		/*
+		 * The vma should either stay at the same address and have the
+		 * original size of 3 pages or we should find the remapped vma
+		 * at the remap destination address with size of 1 page.
+		 */
+		ASSERT_TRUE((vma_start == self->last_line.start_addr &&
+			     vma_end - vma_start == self->page_size * 3) ||
+			    (vma_start == self->last_line.start_addr + self->page_size &&
+			     vma_end - vma_start == self->page_size));
+
 		clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE, &end_ts);
 		end_test_iteration(&end_ts, self->verbose);
 	} while (end_ts.tv_sec - start_ts.tv_sec < self->duration_sec);
-- 
2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog

[PATCH v3 2/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: factor out proc_maps_private fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

Refactor struct proc_maps_private so that the fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY
ioctl are moved into a separate structure. In the next patch this allows
ioctl to reuse some of the functions used for reading /proc/pid/maps
without using file->private_data. This prevents concurrent modification
of file->private_data members by ioctl and /proc/pid/maps readers.

The change is pure code refactoring and has no functional changes.

Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
---
 fs/proc/internal.h   | 15 ++++++----
 fs/proc/task_mmu.c   | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
 fs/proc/task_nommu.c | 14 ++++-----
 3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/proc/internal.h b/fs/proc/internal.h
index e737401d7383..d1598576506c 100644
--- a/fs/proc/internal.h
+++ b/fs/proc/internal.h
@@ -378,16 +378,21 @@ extern void proc_self_init(void);
  * task_[no]mmu.c
  */
 struct mem_size_stats;
-struct proc_maps_private {
-	struct inode *inode;
-	struct task_struct *task;
+
+struct proc_maps_locking_ctx {
 	struct mm_struct *mm;
-	struct vma_iterator iter;
-	loff_t last_pos;
 #ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
 	bool mmap_locked;
 	struct vm_area_struct *locked_vma;
 #endif
+};
+
+struct proc_maps_private {
+	struct inode *inode;
+	struct task_struct *task;
+	struct vma_iterator iter;
+	loff_t last_pos;
+	struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx;
 #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
 	struct mempolicy *task_mempolicy;
 #endif
diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
index ee1e4ccd33bd..45134335e086 100644
--- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
+++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
@@ -132,11 +132,11 @@ static void release_task_mempolicy(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
 
-static void unlock_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
+static void unlock_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
 {
-	if (priv->locked_vma) {
-		vma_end_read(priv->locked_vma);
-		priv->locked_vma = NULL;
+	if (lock_ctx->locked_vma) {
+		vma_end_read(lock_ctx->locked_vma);
+		lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
 	}
 }
 
@@ -151,14 +151,14 @@ static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
 	 * walking the vma tree under rcu read protection.
 	 */
 	if (m->op != &proc_pid_maps_op) {
-		if (mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->mm))
+		if (mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->lock_ctx.mm))
 			return false;
 
-		priv->mmap_locked = true;
+		priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = true;
 	} else {
 		rcu_read_lock();
-		priv->locked_vma = NULL;
-		priv->mmap_locked = false;
+		priv->lock_ctx.locked_vma = NULL;
+		priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = false;
 	}
 
 	return true;
@@ -166,10 +166,10 @@ static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
 
 static inline void unlock_vma_range(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
 {
-	if (priv->mmap_locked) {
-		mmap_read_unlock(priv->mm);
+	if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked) {
+		mmap_read_unlock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
 	} else {
-		unlock_vma(priv);
+		unlock_vma(&priv->lock_ctx);
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	}
 }
@@ -179,13 +179,13 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
 {
 	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
 
-	if (priv->mmap_locked)
+	if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked)
 		return vma_next(&priv->iter);
 
-	unlock_vma(priv);
-	vma = lock_next_vma(priv->mm, &priv->iter, last_pos);
+	unlock_vma(&priv->lock_ctx);
+	vma = lock_next_vma(priv->lock_ctx.mm, &priv->iter, last_pos);
 	if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vma))
-		priv->locked_vma = vma;
+		priv->lock_ctx.locked_vma = vma;
 
 	return vma;
 }
@@ -193,14 +193,14 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
 static inline bool fallback_to_mmap_lock(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
 					 loff_t pos)
 {
-	if (priv->mmap_locked)
+	if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked)
 		return false;
 
 	rcu_read_unlock();
-	mmap_read_lock(priv->mm);
+	mmap_read_lock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
 	/* Reinitialize the iterator after taking mmap_lock */
 	vma_iter_set(&priv->iter, pos);
-	priv->mmap_locked = true;
+	priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = true;
 
 	return true;
 }
@@ -210,12 +210,12 @@ static inline bool fallback_to_mmap_lock(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
 static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
 				  struct proc_maps_private *priv)
 {
-	return mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->mm) == 0;
+	return mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->lock_ctx.mm) == 0;
 }
 
 static inline void unlock_vma_range(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
 {
-	mmap_read_unlock(priv->mm);
+	mmap_read_unlock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
 }
 
 static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *proc_get_vma(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
 		*ppos = vma->vm_end;
 	} else {
 		*ppos = SENTINEL_VMA_GATE;
-		vma = get_gate_vma(priv->mm);
+		vma = get_gate_vma(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
 	}
 
 	return vma;
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
 	if (!priv->task)
 		return ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
 
-	mm = priv->mm;
+	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
 	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm)) {
 		put_task_struct(priv->task);
 		priv->task = NULL;
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ static void *m_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *ppos)
 static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 {
 	struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
-	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
+	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
 
 	if (!priv->task)
 		return;
@@ -339,9 +339,9 @@ static int proc_maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	priv->inode = inode;
-	priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
-	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
-		int err = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
+	priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
+	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
+		int err = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
 
 		seq_release_private(inode, file);
 		return err;
@@ -355,8 +355,8 @@ static int proc_map_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 	struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
 	struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
 
-	if (priv->mm)
-		mmdrop(priv->mm);
+	if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
+		mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
 
 	return seq_release_private(inode, file);
 }
@@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
 	if (!!karg.build_id_size != !!karg.build_id_addr)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	mm = priv->mm;
+	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
 	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm))
 		return -ESRCH;
 
@@ -1311,7 +1311,7 @@ static int show_smaps_rollup(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 {
 	struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
 	struct mem_size_stats mss = {};
-	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
+	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
 	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
 	unsigned long vma_start = 0, last_vma_end = 0;
 	int ret = 0;
@@ -1456,9 +1456,9 @@ static int smaps_rollup_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 		goto out_free;
 
 	priv->inode = inode;
-	priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
-	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
-		ret = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
+	priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
+	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
+		ret = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
 
 		single_release(inode, file);
 		goto out_free;
@@ -1476,8 +1476,8 @@ static int smaps_rollup_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 	struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
 	struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
 
-	if (priv->mm)
-		mmdrop(priv->mm);
+	if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
+		mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
 
 	kfree(priv);
 	return single_release(inode, file);
diff --git a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
index 59bfd61d653a..d362919f4f68 100644
--- a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
+++ b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
 	if (!priv->task)
 		return ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
 
-	mm = priv->mm;
+	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
 	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm)) {
 		put_task_struct(priv->task);
 		priv->task = NULL;
@@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
 static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 {
 	struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
-	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
+	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
 
 	if (!priv->task)
 		return;
@@ -259,9 +259,9 @@ static int maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	priv->inode = inode;
-	priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
-	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
-		int err = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
+	priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
+	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
+		int err = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
 
 		seq_release_private(inode, file);
 		return err;
@@ -276,8 +276,8 @@ static int map_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 	struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
 	struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
 
-	if (priv->mm)
-		mmdrop(priv->mm);
+	if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
+		mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
 
 	return seq_release_private(inode, file);
 }
-- 
2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog

Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: factor out proc_maps_private fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY

[SeongJae Park]

On Wed,  6 Aug 2025 08:59:03 -0700 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:

> Refactor struct proc_maps_private so that the fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY
> ioctl are moved into a separate structure. In the next patch this allows
> ioctl to reuse some of the functions used for reading /proc/pid/maps
> without using file->private_data. This prevents concurrent modification
> of file->private_data members by ioctl and /proc/pid/maps readers.
> 
> The change is pure code refactoring and has no functional changes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>

Acked-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>


Thanks,
SJ

[...]

Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: factor out proc_maps_private fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 08:59:03AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Refactor struct proc_maps_private so that the fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY
> ioctl are moved into a separate structure. In the next patch this allows
> ioctl to reuse some of the functions used for reading /proc/pid/maps
> without using file->private_data. This prevents concurrent modification
> of file->private_data members by ioctl and /proc/pid/maps readers.
>
> The change is pure code refactoring and has no functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> ---
>  fs/proc/internal.h   | 15 ++++++----
>  fs/proc/task_mmu.c   | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>  fs/proc/task_nommu.c | 14 ++++-----
>  3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/internal.h b/fs/proc/internal.h
> index e737401d7383..d1598576506c 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/internal.h
> +++ b/fs/proc/internal.h
> @@ -378,16 +378,21 @@ extern void proc_self_init(void);
>   * task_[no]mmu.c
>   */
>  struct mem_size_stats;
> -struct proc_maps_private {
> -	struct inode *inode;
> -	struct task_struct *task;
> +
> +struct proc_maps_locking_ctx {

Decent name :)

>  	struct mm_struct *mm;
> -	struct vma_iterator iter;
> -	loff_t last_pos;
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
>  	bool mmap_locked;
>  	struct vm_area_struct *locked_vma;
>  #endif
> +};
> +
> +struct proc_maps_private {
> +	struct inode *inode;
> +	struct task_struct *task;
> +	struct vma_iterator iter;
> +	loff_t last_pos;
> +	struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx;
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>  	struct mempolicy *task_mempolicy;
>  #endif

I was going to ask why we have these in internal.h, but then noticed we have to
have a nommu version of the task_mmu stuff for museum pieces and
why-do-they-exist arches, sigh.

> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> index ee1e4ccd33bd..45134335e086 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> @@ -132,11 +132,11 @@ static void release_task_mempolicy(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
>
> -static void unlock_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
> +static void unlock_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
>  {
> -	if (priv->locked_vma) {
> -		vma_end_read(priv->locked_vma);
> -		priv->locked_vma = NULL;
> +	if (lock_ctx->locked_vma) {
> +		vma_end_read(lock_ctx->locked_vma);
> +		lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
>  	}
>  }
>
> @@ -151,14 +151,14 @@ static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
>  	 * walking the vma tree under rcu read protection.
>  	 */
>  	if (m->op != &proc_pid_maps_op) {
> -		if (mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->mm))
> +		if (mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->lock_ctx.mm))
>  			return false;
>
> -		priv->mmap_locked = true;
> +		priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = true;
>  	} else {
>  		rcu_read_lock();
> -		priv->locked_vma = NULL;
> -		priv->mmap_locked = false;
> +		priv->lock_ctx.locked_vma = NULL;
> +		priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = false;
>  	}
>
>  	return true;
> @@ -166,10 +166,10 @@ static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
>
>  static inline void unlock_vma_range(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
>  {

Not sure why we have unlock_vma() parameterised by proc_maps_locking_ctx but
this is parameerised by proc_maps_private?

Seems more consistent to have both parameterised by proc_maps_locking_ctx.

Maybe we'd want lock() forms this way too for consistency?

> -	if (priv->mmap_locked) {
> -		mmap_read_unlock(priv->mm);
> +	if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked) {
> +		mmap_read_unlock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
>  	} else {
> -		unlock_vma(priv);
> +		unlock_vma(&priv->lock_ctx);
>  		rcu_read_unlock();
>  	}
>  }
> @@ -179,13 +179,13 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
>  {
>  	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>

We reference priv->lock_ctx 3 times here, either extract as helper var or pass
in direct perhaps?

> -	if (priv->mmap_locked)
> +	if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked)
>  		return vma_next(&priv->iter);
>
> -	unlock_vma(priv);
> -	vma = lock_next_vma(priv->mm, &priv->iter, last_pos);
> +	unlock_vma(&priv->lock_ctx);
> +	vma = lock_next_vma(priv->lock_ctx.mm, &priv->iter, last_pos);
>  	if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vma))
> -		priv->locked_vma = vma;
> +		priv->lock_ctx.locked_vma = vma;
>
>  	return vma;
>  }
> @@ -193,14 +193,14 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
>  static inline bool fallback_to_mmap_lock(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
>  					 loff_t pos)
>  {

(Also)

We reference priv->lock_ctx 3 times here, either extract as helper var or pass
in direct perhaps?

> -	if (priv->mmap_locked)
> +	if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked)
>  		return false;
>
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
> -	mmap_read_lock(priv->mm);
> +	mmap_read_lock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
>  	/* Reinitialize the iterator after taking mmap_lock */
>  	vma_iter_set(&priv->iter, pos);
> -	priv->mmap_locked = true;
> +	priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = true;
>
>  	return true;
>  }
> @@ -210,12 +210,12 @@ static inline bool fallback_to_mmap_lock(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
>  static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
>  				  struct proc_maps_private *priv)
>  {
> -	return mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->mm) == 0;
> +	return mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->lock_ctx.mm) == 0;
>  }
>
>  static inline void unlock_vma_range(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
>  {
> -	mmap_read_unlock(priv->mm);
> +	mmap_read_unlock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
>  }
>
>  static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
> @@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *proc_get_vma(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
>  		*ppos = vma->vm_end;
>  	} else {
>  		*ppos = SENTINEL_VMA_GATE;
> -		vma = get_gate_vma(priv->mm);
> +		vma = get_gate_vma(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
>  	}
>
>  	return vma;
> @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
>  	if (!priv->task)
>  		return ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
>
> -	mm = priv->mm;
> +	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
>  	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm)) {
>  		put_task_struct(priv->task);
>  		priv->task = NULL;
> @@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ static void *m_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *ppos)
>  static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>  {
>  	struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
> -	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
> +	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
>
>  	if (!priv->task)
>  		return;
> @@ -339,9 +339,9 @@ static int proc_maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>
>  	priv->inode = inode;
> -	priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> -	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
> -		int err = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
> +	priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
> +		int err = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
>
>  		seq_release_private(inode, file);
>  		return err;
> @@ -355,8 +355,8 @@ static int proc_map_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>  	struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
>  	struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
>
> -	if (priv->mm)
> -		mmdrop(priv->mm);
> +	if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
> +		mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
>
>  	return seq_release_private(inode, file);
>  }
> @@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
>  	if (!!karg.build_id_size != !!karg.build_id_addr)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>
> -	mm = priv->mm;
> +	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
>  	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm))
>  		return -ESRCH;
>
> @@ -1311,7 +1311,7 @@ static int show_smaps_rollup(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>  {
>  	struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
>  	struct mem_size_stats mss = {};
> -	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
> +	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;

Nit, but maybe add a

	struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx = priv->lock_ctx;

Here to reduce 'priv->lock_ctx' stuff?

>  	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>  	unsigned long vma_start = 0, last_vma_end = 0;
>  	int ret = 0;
> @@ -1456,9 +1456,9 @@ static int smaps_rollup_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>  		goto out_free;
>
>  	priv->inode = inode;
> -	priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> -	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
> -		ret = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
> +	priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
> +		ret = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
>
>  		single_release(inode, file);
>  		goto out_free;
> @@ -1476,8 +1476,8 @@ static int smaps_rollup_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>  	struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
>  	struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
>
> -	if (priv->mm)
> -		mmdrop(priv->mm);
> +	if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
> +		mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
>
>  	kfree(priv);
>  	return single_release(inode, file);
> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> index 59bfd61d653a..d362919f4f68 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
>  	if (!priv->task)
>  		return ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
>
> -	mm = priv->mm;
> +	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
>  	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm)) {
>  		put_task_struct(priv->task);
>  		priv->task = NULL;
> @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
>  static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>  {
>  	struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
> -	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;

(same as above, I reviewed this upsidedown :P)

NIT, but seems sensible to have a

	struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx = priv->lock_ctx;

Here so we can avoid the ugly 'priv->lock_ctx' stuff below.

> +	struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
>
>  	if (!priv->task)
>  		return;
> @@ -259,9 +259,9 @@ static int maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>
>  	priv->inode = inode;
> -	priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> -	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
> -		int err = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
> +	priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
> +		int err = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;

>
>  		seq_release_private(inode, file);
>  		return err;
> @@ -276,8 +276,8 @@ static int map_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>  	struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
>  	struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
>
> -	if (priv->mm)
> -		mmdrop(priv->mm);
> +	if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
> +		mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
>
>  	return seq_release_private(inode, file);
>  }
> --
> 2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog
>

Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: factor out proc_maps_private fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 11:04 AM Lorenzo Stoakes
<lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 08:59:03AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Refactor struct proc_maps_private so that the fields used by PROCMAP_QUERY
> > ioctl are moved into a separate structure. In the next patch this allows
> > ioctl to reuse some of the functions used for reading /proc/pid/maps
> > without using file->private_data. This prevents concurrent modification
> > of file->private_data members by ioctl and /proc/pid/maps readers.
> >
> > The change is pure code refactoring and has no functional changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> > ---
> >  fs/proc/internal.h   | 15 ++++++----
> >  fs/proc/task_mmu.c   | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> >  fs/proc/task_nommu.c | 14 ++++-----
> >  3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/proc/internal.h b/fs/proc/internal.h
> > index e737401d7383..d1598576506c 100644
> > --- a/fs/proc/internal.h
> > +++ b/fs/proc/internal.h
> > @@ -378,16 +378,21 @@ extern void proc_self_init(void);
> >   * task_[no]mmu.c
> >   */
> >  struct mem_size_stats;
> > -struct proc_maps_private {
> > -     struct inode *inode;
> > -     struct task_struct *task;
> > +
> > +struct proc_maps_locking_ctx {
>
> Decent name :)
>
> >       struct mm_struct *mm;
> > -     struct vma_iterator iter;
> > -     loff_t last_pos;
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
> >       bool mmap_locked;
> >       struct vm_area_struct *locked_vma;
> >  #endif
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct proc_maps_private {
> > +     struct inode *inode;
> > +     struct task_struct *task;
> > +     struct vma_iterator iter;
> > +     loff_t last_pos;
> > +     struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx;
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> >       struct mempolicy *task_mempolicy;
> >  #endif
>
> I was going to ask why we have these in internal.h, but then noticed we have to
> have a nommu version of the task_mmu stuff for museum pieces and
> why-do-they-exist arches, sigh.
>
> > diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > index ee1e4ccd33bd..45134335e086 100644
> > --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > @@ -132,11 +132,11 @@ static void release_task_mempolicy(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
> >
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
> >
> > -static void unlock_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
> > +static void unlock_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> >  {
> > -     if (priv->locked_vma) {
> > -             vma_end_read(priv->locked_vma);
> > -             priv->locked_vma = NULL;
> > +     if (lock_ctx->locked_vma) {
> > +             vma_end_read(lock_ctx->locked_vma);
> > +             lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
> >       }
> >  }
> >
> > @@ -151,14 +151,14 @@ static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
> >        * walking the vma tree under rcu read protection.
> >        */
> >       if (m->op != &proc_pid_maps_op) {
> > -             if (mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->mm))
> > +             if (mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->lock_ctx.mm))
> >                       return false;
> >
> > -             priv->mmap_locked = true;
> > +             priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = true;
> >       } else {
> >               rcu_read_lock();
> > -             priv->locked_vma = NULL;
> > -             priv->mmap_locked = false;
> > +             priv->lock_ctx.locked_vma = NULL;
> > +             priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = false;
> >       }
> >
> >       return true;
> > @@ -166,10 +166,10 @@ static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
> >
> >  static inline void unlock_vma_range(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
> >  {
>
> Not sure why we have unlock_vma() parameterised by proc_maps_locking_ctx but
> this is parameerised by proc_maps_private?
>
> Seems more consistent to have both parameterised by proc_maps_locking_ctx.

True, we can pass just proc_maps_locking_ctx to both lock_vma_range()
and unlock_vma_range(). Will update.

>
> Maybe we'd want lock() forms this way too for consistency?
>
> > -     if (priv->mmap_locked) {
> > -             mmap_read_unlock(priv->mm);
> > +     if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked) {
> > +             mmap_read_unlock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
> >       } else {
> > -             unlock_vma(priv);
> > +             unlock_vma(&priv->lock_ctx);
> >               rcu_read_unlock();
> >       }
> >  }
> > @@ -179,13 +179,13 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
> >  {
> >       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> >
>
> We reference priv->lock_ctx 3 times here, either extract as helper var or pass
> in direct perhaps?
>
> > -     if (priv->mmap_locked)
> > +     if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked)
> >               return vma_next(&priv->iter);
> >
> > -     unlock_vma(priv);
> > -     vma = lock_next_vma(priv->mm, &priv->iter, last_pos);
> > +     unlock_vma(&priv->lock_ctx);
> > +     vma = lock_next_vma(priv->lock_ctx.mm, &priv->iter, last_pos);
> >       if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vma))
> > -             priv->locked_vma = vma;
> > +             priv->lock_ctx.locked_vma = vma;
> >
> >       return vma;
> >  }
> > @@ -193,14 +193,14 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
> >  static inline bool fallback_to_mmap_lock(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
> >                                        loff_t pos)
> >  {
>
> (Also)
>
> We reference priv->lock_ctx 3 times here, either extract as helper var or pass
> in direct perhaps?
>
> > -     if (priv->mmap_locked)
> > +     if (priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked)
> >               return false;
> >
> >       rcu_read_unlock();
> > -     mmap_read_lock(priv->mm);
> > +     mmap_read_lock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
> >       /* Reinitialize the iterator after taking mmap_lock */
> >       vma_iter_set(&priv->iter, pos);
> > -     priv->mmap_locked = true;
> > +     priv->lock_ctx.mmap_locked = true;
> >
> >       return true;
> >  }
> > @@ -210,12 +210,12 @@ static inline bool fallback_to_mmap_lock(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
> >  static inline bool lock_vma_range(struct seq_file *m,
> >                                 struct proc_maps_private *priv)
> >  {
> > -     return mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->mm) == 0;
> > +     return mmap_read_lock_killable(priv->lock_ctx.mm) == 0;
> >  }
> >
> >  static inline void unlock_vma_range(struct proc_maps_private *priv)
> >  {
> > -     mmap_read_unlock(priv->mm);
> > +     mmap_read_unlock(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
> >  }
> >
> >  static struct vm_area_struct *get_next_vma(struct proc_maps_private *priv,
> > @@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *proc_get_vma(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
> >               *ppos = vma->vm_end;
> >       } else {
> >               *ppos = SENTINEL_VMA_GATE;
> > -             vma = get_gate_vma(priv->mm);
> > +             vma = get_gate_vma(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
> >       }
> >
> >       return vma;
> > @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
> >       if (!priv->task)
> >               return ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
> >
> > -     mm = priv->mm;
> > +     mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
> >       if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm)) {
> >               put_task_struct(priv->task);
> >               priv->task = NULL;
> > @@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ static void *m_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *ppos)
> >  static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> >  {
> >       struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
> > -     struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
> > +     struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
> >
> >       if (!priv->task)
> >               return;
> > @@ -339,9 +339,9 @@ static int proc_maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
> >               return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >       priv->inode = inode;
> > -     priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> > -     if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
> > -             int err = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
> > +     priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> > +     if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
> > +             int err = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
> >
> >               seq_release_private(inode, file);
> >               return err;
> > @@ -355,8 +355,8 @@ static int proc_map_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> >       struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
> >       struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
> >
> > -     if (priv->mm)
> > -             mmdrop(priv->mm);
> > +     if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
> > +             mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
> >
> >       return seq_release_private(inode, file);
> >  }
> > @@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> >       if (!!karg.build_id_size != !!karg.build_id_addr)
> >               return -EINVAL;
> >
> > -     mm = priv->mm;
> > +     mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
> >       if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm))
> >               return -ESRCH;
> >
> > @@ -1311,7 +1311,7 @@ static int show_smaps_rollup(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> >  {
> >       struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
> >       struct mem_size_stats mss = {};
> > -     struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
> > +     struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
>
> Nit, but maybe add a
>
>         struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx = priv->lock_ctx;
>
> Here to reduce 'priv->lock_ctx' stuff?

Yep, will do that in all the places. Thanks!

>
> >       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> >       unsigned long vma_start = 0, last_vma_end = 0;
> >       int ret = 0;
> > @@ -1456,9 +1456,9 @@ static int smaps_rollup_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> >               goto out_free;
> >
> >       priv->inode = inode;
> > -     priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> > -     if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
> > -             ret = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
> > +     priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> > +     if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
> > +             ret = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
> >
> >               single_release(inode, file);
> >               goto out_free;
> > @@ -1476,8 +1476,8 @@ static int smaps_rollup_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> >       struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
> >       struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
> >
> > -     if (priv->mm)
> > -             mmdrop(priv->mm);
> > +     if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
> > +             mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
> >
> >       kfree(priv);
> >       return single_release(inode, file);
> > diff --git a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> > index 59bfd61d653a..d362919f4f68 100644
> > --- a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> > +++ b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> > @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
> >       if (!priv->task)
> >               return ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
> >
> > -     mm = priv->mm;
> > +     mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
> >       if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm)) {
> >               put_task_struct(priv->task);
> >               priv->task = NULL;
> > @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *ppos)
> >  static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> >  {
> >       struct proc_maps_private *priv = m->private;
> > -     struct mm_struct *mm = priv->mm;
>
> (same as above, I reviewed this upsidedown :P)
>
> NIT, but seems sensible to have a
>
>         struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx = priv->lock_ctx;
>
> Here so we can avoid the ugly 'priv->lock_ctx' stuff below.
>
> > +     struct mm_struct *mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
> >
> >       if (!priv->task)
> >               return;
> > @@ -259,9 +259,9 @@ static int maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
> >               return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >       priv->inode = inode;
> > -     priv->mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> > -     if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->mm)) {
> > -             int err = priv->mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->mm) : -ESRCH;
> > +     priv->lock_ctx.mm = proc_mem_open(inode, PTRACE_MODE_READ);
> > +     if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(priv->lock_ctx.mm)) {
> > +             int err = priv->lock_ctx.mm ? PTR_ERR(priv->lock_ctx.mm) : -ESRCH;
>
> >
> >               seq_release_private(inode, file);
> >               return err;
> > @@ -276,8 +276,8 @@ static int map_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> >       struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data;
> >       struct proc_maps_private *priv = seq->private;
> >
> > -     if (priv->mm)
> > -             mmdrop(priv->mm);
> > +     if (priv->lock_ctx.mm)
> > +             mmdrop(priv->lock_ctx.mm);
> >
> >       return seq_release_private(inode, file);
> >  }
> > --
> > 2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog
> >

[PATCH v3 3/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma locks

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

Utilize per-vma locks to stabilize vma after lookup without taking
mmap_lock during PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl execution. If vma lock is
contended, we fall back to mmap_lock but take it only momentarily
to lock the vma and release the mmap_lock. In a very unlikely case
of vm_refcnt overflow, this fall back path will fail and ioctl is
done under mmap_lock protection.

This change is designed to reduce mmap_lock contention and prevent
PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl calls from blocking address space updates.

Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
---
 fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
index 45134335e086..0396315dfaee 100644
--- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
+++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
@@ -517,28 +517,81 @@ static int pid_maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 		PROCMAP_QUERY_VMA_FLAGS				\
 )
 
-static int query_vma_setup(struct mm_struct *mm)
+#ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
+
+static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
 {
-	return mmap_read_lock_killable(mm);
+	lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
+	lock_ctx->mmap_locked = false;
+
+	return 0;
 }
 
-static void query_vma_teardown(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
+static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
 {
-	mmap_read_unlock(mm);
+	if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
+		mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);
+	else
+		unlock_vma(lock_ctx);
+}
+
+static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
+						     unsigned long addr)
+{
+	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
+	struct vma_iterator vmi;
+
+	if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
+		return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
+
+	unlock_vma(lock_ctx);
+	rcu_read_lock();
+	vma_iter_init(&vmi, lock_ctx->mm, addr);
+	vma = lock_next_vma(lock_ctx->mm, &vmi, addr);
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+
+	if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vma)) {
+		lock_ctx->locked_vma = vma;
+	} else if (PTR_ERR(vma) == -EAGAIN) {
+		/* Fallback to mmap_lock on vma->vm_refcnt overflow */
+		mmap_read_lock(lock_ctx->mm);
+		vma = find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
+		lock_ctx->mmap_locked = true;
+	}
+
+	return vma;
+}
+
+#else /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
+
+static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
+{
+	return mmap_read_lock_killable(lock_ctx->mm);
 }
 
-static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
+static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
 {
-	return find_vma(mm, addr);
+	mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);
 }
 
-static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
+static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
+						     unsigned long addr)
+{
+	return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
+}
+
+#endif  /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
+
+static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
 						 unsigned long addr, u32 flags)
 {
 	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
 
 next_vma:
-	vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(mm, addr);
+	vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(lock_ctx, addr);
+	if (IS_ERR(vma))
+		return vma;
+
 	if (!vma)
 		goto no_vma;
 
@@ -579,11 +632,11 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
 	return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
 }
 
-static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
+static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm, void __user *uarg)
 {
+	struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx = { .mm = mm };
 	struct procmap_query karg;
 	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
-	struct mm_struct *mm;
 	const char *name = NULL;
 	char build_id_buf[BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX], *name_buf = NULL;
 	__u64 usize;
@@ -610,17 +663,16 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
 	if (!!karg.build_id_size != !!karg.build_id_addr)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
 	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm))
 		return -ESRCH;
 
-	err = query_vma_setup(mm);
+	err = query_vma_setup(&lock_ctx);
 	if (err) {
 		mmput(mm);
 		return err;
 	}
 
-	vma = query_matching_vma(mm, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
+	vma = query_matching_vma(&lock_ctx, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
 	if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
 		err = PTR_ERR(vma);
 		vma = NULL;
@@ -705,7 +757,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
 	}
 
 	/* unlock vma or mmap_lock, and put mm_struct before copying data to user */
-	query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
+	query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
 	mmput(mm);
 
 	if (karg.vma_name_size && copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(karg.vma_name_addr),
@@ -725,7 +777,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
 	return 0;
 
 out:
-	query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
+	query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
 	mmput(mm);
 	kfree(name_buf);
 	return err;
@@ -738,7 +790,7 @@ static long procfs_procmap_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned l
 
 	switch (cmd) {
 	case PROCMAP_QUERY:
-		return do_procmap_query(priv, (void __user *)arg);
+		return do_procmap_query(priv->lock_ctx.mm, (void __user *)arg);
 	default:
 		return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
 	}
-- 
2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog

Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma locks

[SeongJae Park]

On Wed,  6 Aug 2025 08:59:04 -0700 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:

> Utilize per-vma locks to stabilize vma after lookup without taking
> mmap_lock during PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl execution. If vma lock is
> contended, we fall back to mmap_lock but take it only momentarily
> to lock the vma and release the mmap_lock. In a very unlikely case
> of vm_refcnt overflow, this fall back path will fail and ioctl is
> done under mmap_lock protection.
> 
> This change is designed to reduce mmap_lock contention and prevent
> PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl calls from blocking address space updates.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>

Acked-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>


Thanks,
SJ

[...]

Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma locks

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 08:59:04AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Utilize per-vma locks to stabilize vma after lookup without taking
> mmap_lock during PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl execution. If vma lock is
> contended, we fall back to mmap_lock but take it only momentarily
> to lock the vma and release the mmap_lock. In a very unlikely case
> of vm_refcnt overflow, this fall back path will fail and ioctl is
> done under mmap_lock protection.
>
> This change is designed to reduce mmap_lock contention and prevent
> PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl calls from blocking address space updates.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>

A lot of nits but nothing's really standing out as broken, AFAICT...

> ---
>  fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> index 45134335e086..0396315dfaee 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> @@ -517,28 +517,81 @@ static int pid_maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>  		PROCMAP_QUERY_VMA_FLAGS				\
>  )
>
> -static int query_vma_setup(struct mm_struct *mm)
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
> +
> +static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
>  {
> -	return mmap_read_lock_killable(mm);
> +	lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
> +	lock_ctx->mmap_locked = false;

We also do this in lock_vma_range(), seems sensible to factor out? E.g.:

static void ctx_clear_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
{
	lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
	lock_ctx->mmap_locked = false;
}

> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
>
> -static void query_vma_teardown(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> +static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
>  {
> -	mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> +	if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
> +		mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);

Maybe worth a comment as to why we leave lock_ctx->mmap_locked set here?

> +	else
> +		unlock_vma(lock_ctx);

Should have said on 2/3, but I wonder if we should prefix with ctx_, as
'unlock_vma()' and 'lock_vma()' seem like core functions... esp. since we
have vma_start_read/write() rather than functions that reference locking.

So - ctx_unlock_vma() and ctx_lock_vma() or unlock_ctx_vma() /
lock_ctx_vma()?

> +}
> +
> +static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> +						     unsigned long addr)
> +{
> +	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> +	struct vma_iterator vmi;
> +
> +	if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
> +		return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> +
> +	unlock_vma(lock_ctx);
> +	rcu_read_lock();
> +	vma_iter_init(&vmi, lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> +	vma = lock_next_vma(lock_ctx->mm, &vmi, addr);
> +	rcu_read_unlock();

I think a comment at the top of this block would be useful, something like
'We unlock any previously locked VMA and find the next under RCU'.

> +
> +	if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vma)) {

Is the NULL bit here really necessary? presumably lock_ctx->locked_vma is
expected to be NULL already, so we're not overwriting anything here.

In fact we could get rid of the horrid if/else here with a guard clause like:

	if (!IS_ERR(vma) || PTR_ERR(vma) != -EAGAIN)
		return vma;

(the !IS_ERR() bit is probably a bit redundant but makes things clearer
vs. just the PTR_ERR() thing)

Then do the rest below.


> +		lock_ctx->locked_vma = vma;
> +	} else if (PTR_ERR(vma) == -EAGAIN) {
> +		/* Fallback to mmap_lock on vma->vm_refcnt overflow */
> +		mmap_read_lock(lock_ctx->mm);
> +		vma = find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> +		lock_ctx->mmap_locked = true;

Kinda sucks we have two separate ways of doing fallback now, this
open-coded thing and fallback_to_mmap_lock().

Sort of hard to combine since we have subtly diffrent semantics - the RCU
read lock is being held in the /proc/$pid/maps case, but here we've
released it already.

> +	}
> +
> +	return vma;
> +}
> +
> +#else /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
> +
> +static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> +{
> +	return mmap_read_lock_killable(lock_ctx->mm);
>  }
>
> -static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
> +static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
>  {
> -	return find_vma(mm, addr);
> +	mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);
>  }
>
> -static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
> +static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> +						     unsigned long addr)
> +{
> +	return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> +}
> +
> +#endif  /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
> +
> +static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
>  						 unsigned long addr, u32 flags)
>  {
>  	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>
>  next_vma:
> -	vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(mm, addr);
> +	vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(lock_ctx, addr);
> +	if (IS_ERR(vma))
> +		return vma;
> +
>  	if (!vma)
>  		goto no_vma;
>
> @@ -579,11 +632,11 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
>  	return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
>  }
>
> -static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> +static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm, void __user *uarg)
>  {
> +	struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx = { .mm = mm };

>  	struct procmap_query karg;
>  	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> -	struct mm_struct *mm;
>  	const char *name = NULL;
>  	char build_id_buf[BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX], *name_buf = NULL;
>  	__u64 usize;
> @@ -610,17 +663,16 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
>  	if (!!karg.build_id_size != !!karg.build_id_addr)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>
> -	mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
>  	if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm))
>  		return -ESRCH;
>
> -	err = query_vma_setup(mm);
> +	err = query_vma_setup(&lock_ctx);
>  	if (err) {
>  		mmput(mm);
>  		return err;
>  	}
>
> -	vma = query_matching_vma(mm, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
> +	vma = query_matching_vma(&lock_ctx, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
>  	if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
>  		err = PTR_ERR(vma);
>  		vma = NULL;
> @@ -705,7 +757,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
>  	}
>
>  	/* unlock vma or mmap_lock, and put mm_struct before copying data to user */
> -	query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
> +	query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
>  	mmput(mm);
>
>  	if (karg.vma_name_size && copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(karg.vma_name_addr),
> @@ -725,7 +777,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
>  	return 0;
>
>  out:
> -	query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
> +	query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
>  	mmput(mm);
>  	kfree(name_buf);
>  	return err;
> @@ -738,7 +790,7 @@ static long procfs_procmap_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned l
>
>  	switch (cmd) {
>  	case PROCMAP_QUERY:
> -		return do_procmap_query(priv, (void __user *)arg);
> +		return do_procmap_query(priv->lock_ctx.mm, (void __user *)arg);

OK this confused me until I worked it through.

We set priv->lock_ctx.mm in:

pid_maps_open() -> do_maps_open() -> proc_maps_open()

Which it gets from proc_mem_open() which figures out the mm.

Maybe one for 2/3, but it'd be nice to have a comment saying something
about how this is set, since it being part of lock_ctx makes it seem like
it's something that would be set elsewhere.

Since we have fallback stuff and want to thread through this new lokc
context type I guess it makes sense to put it here but given that's the
case, let's maybe just add a comment here to clarify.

>  	default:
>  		return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
>  	}
> --
> 2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog
>

Cheers, Lorenzo

Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma locks

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 12:03 PM Lorenzo Stoakes
<lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 08:59:04AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Utilize per-vma locks to stabilize vma after lookup without taking
> > mmap_lock during PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl execution. If vma lock is
> > contended, we fall back to mmap_lock but take it only momentarily
> > to lock the vma and release the mmap_lock. In a very unlikely case
> > of vm_refcnt overflow, this fall back path will fail and ioctl is
> > done under mmap_lock protection.
> >
> > This change is designed to reduce mmap_lock contention and prevent
> > PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl calls from blocking address space updates.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
>
> A lot of nits but nothing's really standing out as broken, AFAICT...
>
> > ---
> >  fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> >  1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > index 45134335e086..0396315dfaee 100644
> > --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > @@ -517,28 +517,81 @@ static int pid_maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> >               PROCMAP_QUERY_VMA_FLAGS                         \
> >  )
> >
> > -static int query_vma_setup(struct mm_struct *mm)
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
> > +
> > +static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> >  {
> > -     return mmap_read_lock_killable(mm);
> > +     lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
> > +     lock_ctx->mmap_locked = false;
>
> We also do this in lock_vma_range(), seems sensible to factor out? E.g.:
>
> static void ctx_clear_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)

That name really confused me :) Maybe lock_vma_ctx_init() or something
along these lines. If we can't think of a good name I would prefer to
keep it as is, given it's only two lines and used only in two places.

> {
>         lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
>         lock_ctx->mmap_locked = false;
> }
>
> > +
> > +     return 0;
> >  }
> >
> > -static void query_vma_teardown(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > +static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> >  {
> > -     mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> > +     if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
> > +             mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);
>
> Maybe worth a comment as to why we leave lock_ctx->mmap_locked set here?

Sure. The reason is that this is a teardown stage and lock_ctx won't
be used anymore. I guess I could reset it just to leave lock_ctx
consistent instead of adding a comment. Will do that.

>
> > +     else
> > +             unlock_vma(lock_ctx);
>
> Should have said on 2/3, but I wonder if we should prefix with ctx_, as
> 'unlock_vma()' and 'lock_vma()' seem like core functions... esp. since we
> have vma_start_read/write() rather than functions that reference locking.
>
> So - ctx_unlock_vma() and ctx_lock_vma() or unlock_ctx_vma() /
> lock_ctx_vma()?

unlock_ctx_vma() / lock_ctx_vma() sounds good to me.

>
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> > +                                                  unsigned long addr)
> > +{
> > +     struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > +     struct vma_iterator vmi;
> > +
> > +     if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
> > +             return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > +
> > +     unlock_vma(lock_ctx);
> > +     rcu_read_lock();
> > +     vma_iter_init(&vmi, lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > +     vma = lock_next_vma(lock_ctx->mm, &vmi, addr);
> > +     rcu_read_unlock();
>
> I think a comment at the top of this block would be useful, something like
> 'We unlock any previously locked VMA and find the next under RCU'.

Ack.

>
> > +
> > +     if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vma)) {
>
> Is the NULL bit here really necessary? presumably lock_ctx->locked_vma is
> expected to be NULL already, so we're not overwriting anything here.
>
> In fact we could get rid of the horrid if/else here with a guard clause like:
>
>         if (!IS_ERR(vma) || PTR_ERR(vma) != -EAGAIN)
>                 return vma;

We still need to assign lock_ctx->locked_vma when !IS_ERR(vma) before
we return the vma, so the lines about would not be correct. I can
change it to:

if (!vma)
    return NULL;

if (!IS_ERR(vma)) {
    lock_ctx->locked_vma = vma;
    return vma;
}

if (PTR_ERR(vma) == -EAGAIN) {
    /* Fallback to mmap_lock on vma->vm_refcnt overflow */
    ...
}
return vma;

I think that would be the equivalent of what I currently have. Would
you prefer that?

>
> (the !IS_ERR() bit is probably a bit redundant but makes things clearer
> vs. just the PTR_ERR() thing)
>
> Then do the rest below.
>
>
> > +             lock_ctx->locked_vma = vma;
> > +     } else if (PTR_ERR(vma) == -EAGAIN) {
> > +             /* Fallback to mmap_lock on vma->vm_refcnt overflow */
> > +             mmap_read_lock(lock_ctx->mm);
> > +             vma = find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > +             lock_ctx->mmap_locked = true;
>
> Kinda sucks we have two separate ways of doing fallback now, this
> open-coded thing and fallback_to_mmap_lock().
>
> Sort of hard to combine since we have subtly diffrent semantics - the RCU
> read lock is being held in the /proc/$pid/maps case, but here we've
> released it already.

Yeah, plus that one uses iterators and this one doesn't... I don't
think it's worth trying to shoehorn them together given that the code
is quite short.

>
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     return vma;
> > +}
> > +
> > +#else /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
> > +
> > +static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> > +{
> > +     return mmap_read_lock_killable(lock_ctx->mm);
> >  }
> >
> > -static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
> > +static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> >  {
> > -     return find_vma(mm, addr);
> > +     mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);
> >  }
> >
> > -static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > +static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> > +                                                  unsigned long addr)
> > +{
> > +     return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > +}
> > +
> > +#endif  /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
> > +
> > +static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> >                                                unsigned long addr, u32 flags)
> >  {
> >       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> >
> >  next_vma:
> > -     vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(mm, addr);
> > +     vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(lock_ctx, addr);
> > +     if (IS_ERR(vma))
> > +             return vma;
> > +
> >       if (!vma)
> >               goto no_vma;
> >
> > @@ -579,11 +632,11 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
> >       return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> >  }
> >
> > -static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> > +static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm, void __user *uarg)
> >  {
> > +     struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx = { .mm = mm };
>
> >       struct procmap_query karg;
> >       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > -     struct mm_struct *mm;
> >       const char *name = NULL;
> >       char build_id_buf[BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX], *name_buf = NULL;
> >       __u64 usize;
> > @@ -610,17 +663,16 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> >       if (!!karg.build_id_size != !!karg.build_id_addr)
> >               return -EINVAL;
> >
> > -     mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
> >       if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm))
> >               return -ESRCH;
> >
> > -     err = query_vma_setup(mm);
> > +     err = query_vma_setup(&lock_ctx);
> >       if (err) {
> >               mmput(mm);
> >               return err;
> >       }
> >
> > -     vma = query_matching_vma(mm, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
> > +     vma = query_matching_vma(&lock_ctx, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
> >       if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
> >               err = PTR_ERR(vma);
> >               vma = NULL;
> > @@ -705,7 +757,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> >       }
> >
> >       /* unlock vma or mmap_lock, and put mm_struct before copying data to user */
> > -     query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
> > +     query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> >       mmput(mm);
> >
> >       if (karg.vma_name_size && copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(karg.vma_name_addr),
> > @@ -725,7 +777,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> >       return 0;
> >
> >  out:
> > -     query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
> > +     query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> >       mmput(mm);
> >       kfree(name_buf);
> >       return err;
> > @@ -738,7 +790,7 @@ static long procfs_procmap_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned l
> >
> >       switch (cmd) {
> >       case PROCMAP_QUERY:
> > -             return do_procmap_query(priv, (void __user *)arg);
> > +             return do_procmap_query(priv->lock_ctx.mm, (void __user *)arg);
>
> OK this confused me until I worked it through.
>
> We set priv->lock_ctx.mm in:
>
> pid_maps_open() -> do_maps_open() -> proc_maps_open()
>
> Which it gets from proc_mem_open() which figures out the mm.
>
> Maybe one for 2/3, but it'd be nice to have a comment saying something
> about how this is set, since it being part of lock_ctx makes it seem like
> it's something that would be set elsewhere.
>
> Since we have fallback stuff and want to thread through this new lokc
> context type I guess it makes sense to put it here but given that's the
> case, let's maybe just add a comment here to clarify.

Ok, something like "lock_ctx.mm is set during file open operation" ?

>
> >       default:
> >               return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
> >       }
> > --
> > 2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog
> >
>
> Cheers, Lorenzo

Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under per-vma locks

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 02:46:00PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 12:03 PM Lorenzo Stoakes
> <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 08:59:04AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > Utilize per-vma locks to stabilize vma after lookup without taking
> > > mmap_lock during PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl execution. If vma lock is
> > > contended, we fall back to mmap_lock but take it only momentarily
> > > to lock the vma and release the mmap_lock. In a very unlikely case
> > > of vm_refcnt overflow, this fall back path will fail and ioctl is
> > > done under mmap_lock protection.
> > >
> > > This change is designed to reduce mmap_lock contention and prevent
> > > PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl calls from blocking address space updates.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> >
> > A lot of nits but nothing's really standing out as broken, AFAICT...
> >
> > > ---
> > >  fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > >  1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > > index 45134335e086..0396315dfaee 100644
> > > --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > > +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > > @@ -517,28 +517,81 @@ static int pid_maps_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> > >               PROCMAP_QUERY_VMA_FLAGS                         \
> > >  )
> > >
> > > -static int query_vma_setup(struct mm_struct *mm)
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
> > > +
> > > +static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> > >  {
> > > -     return mmap_read_lock_killable(mm);
> > > +     lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
> > > +     lock_ctx->mmap_locked = false;
> >
> > We also do this in lock_vma_range(), seems sensible to factor out? E.g.:
> >
> > static void ctx_clear_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
>
> That name really confused me :) Maybe lock_vma_ctx_init() or something
> along these lines. If we can't think of a good name I would prefer to
> keep it as is, given it's only two lines and used only in two places.

Yeah you're right, that name isn't great (it's hard to get naming right
isn't it? :P)

I think it's worth separating out just because I find this:

helper_struct->field1 = X;
helper_struct->field2 = Y;

Open-coding fiddly and prone to error, what if you add a new field later
etc.

It's also semantically useful to know that updating one field impliles the
update of another.

>
> > {
> >         lock_ctx->locked_vma = NULL;
> >         lock_ctx->mmap_locked = false;
> > }
> >
> > > +
> > > +     return 0;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -static void query_vma_teardown(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > > +static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> > >  {
> > > -     mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> > > +     if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
> > > +             mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);
> >
> > Maybe worth a comment as to why we leave lock_ctx->mmap_locked set here?
>
> Sure. The reason is that this is a teardown stage and lock_ctx won't
> be used anymore. I guess I could reset it just to leave lock_ctx
> consistent instead of adding a comment. Will do that.

Thanks makes sense.

>
> >
> > > +     else
> > > +             unlock_vma(lock_ctx);
> >
> > Should have said on 2/3, but I wonder if we should prefix with ctx_, as
> > 'unlock_vma()' and 'lock_vma()' seem like core functions... esp. since we
> > have vma_start_read/write() rather than functions that reference locking.
> >
> > So - ctx_unlock_vma() and ctx_lock_vma() or unlock_ctx_vma() /
> > lock_ctx_vma()?
>
> unlock_ctx_vma() / lock_ctx_vma() sounds good to me.
>
> >
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> > > +                                                  unsigned long addr)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > > +     struct vma_iterator vmi;
> > > +
> > > +     if (lock_ctx->mmap_locked)
> > > +             return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > > +
> > > +     unlock_vma(lock_ctx);
> > > +     rcu_read_lock();
> > > +     vma_iter_init(&vmi, lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > > +     vma = lock_next_vma(lock_ctx->mm, &vmi, addr);
> > > +     rcu_read_unlock();
> >
> > I think a comment at the top of this block would be useful, something like
> > 'We unlock any previously locked VMA and find the next under RCU'.
>
> Ack.
>
> >
> > > +
> > > +     if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(vma)) {
> >
> > Is the NULL bit here really necessary? presumably lock_ctx->locked_vma is
> > expected to be NULL already, so we're not overwriting anything here.
> >
> > In fact we could get rid of the horrid if/else here with a guard clause like:
> >
> >         if (!IS_ERR(vma) || PTR_ERR(vma) != -EAGAIN)
> >                 return vma;
>
> We still need to assign lock_ctx->locked_vma when !IS_ERR(vma) before
> we return the vma, so the lines about would not be correct. I can
> change it to:
>
> if (!vma)
>     return NULL;
>
> if (!IS_ERR(vma)) {
>     lock_ctx->locked_vma = vma;
>     return vma;
> }
>
> if (PTR_ERR(vma) == -EAGAIN) {
>     /* Fallback to mmap_lock on vma->vm_refcnt overflow */
>     ...
> }
> return vma;
>
> I think that would be the equivalent of what I currently have. Would
> you prefer that?

Yeah sorry, sort of sketching this out quickly here.

Yeah what you suggest looks good thanks!

>
> >
> > (the !IS_ERR() bit is probably a bit redundant but makes things clearer
> > vs. just the PTR_ERR() thing)
> >
> > Then do the rest below.
> >
> >
> > > +             lock_ctx->locked_vma = vma;
> > > +     } else if (PTR_ERR(vma) == -EAGAIN) {
> > > +             /* Fallback to mmap_lock on vma->vm_refcnt overflow */
> > > +             mmap_read_lock(lock_ctx->mm);
> > > +             vma = find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > > +             lock_ctx->mmap_locked = true;
> >
> > Kinda sucks we have two separate ways of doing fallback now, this
> > open-coded thing and fallback_to_mmap_lock().
> >
> > Sort of hard to combine since we have subtly diffrent semantics - the RCU
> > read lock is being held in the /proc/$pid/maps case, but here we've
> > released it already.
>
> Yeah, plus that one uses iterators and this one doesn't... I don't
> think it's worth trying to shoehorn them together given that the code
> is quite short.

Yeah right.

I sort of wish we could have things be a little more consistent across the
two, but I think that would need to be part of a refactoring of this code
in general, so is not really relevant here.

So leave it as-is for now that's fine!

>
> >
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > > +     return vma;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +#else /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
> > > +
> > > +static int query_vma_setup(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> > > +{
> > > +     return mmap_read_lock_killable(lock_ctx->mm);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
> > > +static void query_vma_teardown(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx)
> > >  {
> > > -     return find_vma(mm, addr);
> > > +     mmap_read_unlock(lock_ctx->mm);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > +static struct vm_area_struct *query_vma_find_by_addr(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> > > +                                                  unsigned long addr)
> > > +{
> > > +     return find_vma(lock_ctx->mm, addr);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +#endif  /* CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK */
> > > +
> > > +static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct proc_maps_locking_ctx *lock_ctx,
> > >                                                unsigned long addr, u32 flags)
> > >  {
> > >       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > >
> > >  next_vma:
> > > -     vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(mm, addr);
> > > +     vma = query_vma_find_by_addr(lock_ctx, addr);
> > > +     if (IS_ERR(vma))
> > > +             return vma;
> > > +
> > >       if (!vma)
> > >               goto no_vma;
> > >
> > > @@ -579,11 +632,11 @@ static struct vm_area_struct *query_matching_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > >       return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> > > +static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm, void __user *uarg)
> > >  {
> > > +     struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx = { .mm = mm };
> >
> > >       struct procmap_query karg;
> > >       struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > > -     struct mm_struct *mm;
> > >       const char *name = NULL;
> > >       char build_id_buf[BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX], *name_buf = NULL;
> > >       __u64 usize;
> > > @@ -610,17 +663,16 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> > >       if (!!karg.build_id_size != !!karg.build_id_addr)
> > >               return -EINVAL;
> > >
> > > -     mm = priv->lock_ctx.mm;
> > >       if (!mm || !mmget_not_zero(mm))
> > >               return -ESRCH;
> > >
> > > -     err = query_vma_setup(mm);
> > > +     err = query_vma_setup(&lock_ctx);
> > >       if (err) {
> > >               mmput(mm);
> > >               return err;
> > >       }
> > >
> > > -     vma = query_matching_vma(mm, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
> > > +     vma = query_matching_vma(&lock_ctx, karg.query_addr, karg.query_flags);
> > >       if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
> > >               err = PTR_ERR(vma);
> > >               vma = NULL;
> > > @@ -705,7 +757,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> > >       }
> > >
> > >       /* unlock vma or mmap_lock, and put mm_struct before copying data to user */
> > > -     query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
> > > +     query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> > >       mmput(mm);
> > >
> > >       if (karg.vma_name_size && copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(karg.vma_name_addr),
> > > @@ -725,7 +777,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct proc_maps_private *priv, void __user *uarg)
> > >       return 0;
> > >
> > >  out:
> > > -     query_vma_teardown(mm, vma);
> > > +     query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> > >       mmput(mm);
> > >       kfree(name_buf);
> > >       return err;
> > > @@ -738,7 +790,7 @@ static long procfs_procmap_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned l
> > >
> > >       switch (cmd) {
> > >       case PROCMAP_QUERY:
> > > -             return do_procmap_query(priv, (void __user *)arg);
> > > +             return do_procmap_query(priv->lock_ctx.mm, (void __user *)arg);
> >
> > OK this confused me until I worked it through.
> >
> > We set priv->lock_ctx.mm in:
> >
> > pid_maps_open() -> do_maps_open() -> proc_maps_open()
> >
> > Which it gets from proc_mem_open() which figures out the mm.
> >
> > Maybe one for 2/3, but it'd be nice to have a comment saying something
> > about how this is set, since it being part of lock_ctx makes it seem like
> > it's something that would be set elsewhere.
> >
> > Since we have fallback stuff and want to thread through this new lokc
> > context type I guess it makes sense to put it here but given that's the
> > case, let's maybe just add a comment here to clarify.
>
> Ok, something like "lock_ctx.mm is set during file open operation" ?

Yeah that's fine thanks!

>
> >
> > >       default:
> > >               return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
> > >       }
> > > --
> > > 2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog
> > >
> >
> > Cheers, Lorenzo