Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: replace rw_semaphore with atomic_t in vma_lock

Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-12-13T17:41:34Z

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 1:22 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 06:17:44AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 1:17 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 07:01:16PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > I think your proposal should work. Let me try to code it and see if
> > > > > > > something breaks.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, I tried it out and things are a bit more complex:
> > > > 1. We should allow write-locking a detached VMA, IOW vma_start_write()
> > > > can be called when vm_refcnt is 0.
> > >
> > > This sounds dodgy, refcnt being zero basically means the object is dead
> > > and you shouldn't be touching it no more. Where does this happen and
> > > why?
> > >
> > > Notably, it being 0 means it is no longer in the mas tree and can't be
> > > found anymore.
> >
> > It happens when a newly created vma that was not yet attached
> > (vma->vm_refcnt = 0) is write-locked before being added into the vma
> > tree. For example:
> > mmap()
> > mmap_write_lock()
> > vma = vm_area_alloc() // vma->vm_refcnt = 0 (detached)
> > //vma attributes are initialized
> > vma_start_write() // write 0x8000 0001 into vma->vm_refcnt
> > mas_store_gfp()
> > vma_mark_attached()
> > mmap_write_lock() // vma_end_write_all()
> >
> > In this scenario, we write-lock the VMA before adding it into the tree
> > to prevent readers (pagefaults) from using it until we drop the
> > mmap_write_lock().
>
> Ah, but you can do that by setting vma->vm_lock_seq and setting the ref
> to 1 before adding it (its not visible before adding anyway, so nobody
> cares).
>
> You'll note that the read thing checks both the msb (or other high bit
> depending on the actual type you're going with) *and* the seq. That is
> needed because we must not set the sequence number before all existing
> readers are drained, but since this is pre-add that is not a concern.

Yes, I realized that there is an interesting rule that help in this
case: vma_mark_attached() is called only on a newly created vma which
can't be found by anyone else or the vma is already locked, therefore
vma_start_write() can never race with vma_mark_attached(). Considering
that vma_mark_attached() is the only one that can raise vma->vm_refcnt
from 0, vma_start_write() can set vma->vm_lock_seq without modifying
vma->vm_refcnt at all if vma->vm_refcnt==0.

>
> > > > 2. Adding 0x80000000 saturates refcnt, so I have to use a lower bit
> > > > 0x40000000 to denote writers.
> > >
> > > I'm confused, what? We're talking about atomic_t, right?
> >
> > I thought you suggested using refcount_t. According to
> > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.13-rc2/source/include/linux/refcount.h#L22
> > valid values would be [0..0x7fff_ffff] and 0x80000000 is outside of
> > that range. What am I missing?
>
> I was talking about atomic_t :-), but yeah, maybe we can use refcount_t,
> but I hadn't initially considered that.

My current implementation is using refcount_t but I might have to
change that to atomic_t to handle vm_refcnt overflows in
vma_start_read().

>