On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 5:15 PM Linus Torvalds
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 at 16:25, Mateusz Guzik [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I know of these guys, I think they are excluded as is -- they go
through access_remote_vm, starting with:
        if (mmap_read_lock_killable(mm))
                return 0;

while dup_mmap already write locks the parent's mm.

Oh, you're only worried about vma_start_write()?

That's a non-issue. It doesn't take the lock normally, since it starts off with

        if (__is_vma_write_locked(vma, &mm_lock_seq))
                return;

which catches on the lock sequence number already being set.

That check will prevent re-locking but if vma is not already locked
then the call will proceed with obtaining the lock and setting
vma->vm_lock_seq to mm->mm_lock_seq.

So no extra locking there.

Well, technically there's extra locking because the code stupidly
doesn't initialize new vma allocations to the right sequence number,
but that was talked about here:

    https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wiCrWAoEesBuoGoqqufvesicbGp3cX0LyKgEvsFaZNpDA@mail.gmail.com/ (local)

and it's a separate issue.

          Linus

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel