Re: [PATCH] exit: clear TIF_MEMDIE after exit_task_work

Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-03-01T16:22:37Z

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).

At a quick glance, it seems that it's needed: it calls
get_user_pages(mm) and that looks like it will not DTRT (or even fail
gracefully) if mm->mm_users == 0 and exit_mmap/etc was already called
(or is in progress).

--
MST