Re: [PATCH v9 03/10] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap
From: Liam Howlett <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-05 03:40:03
Also in:
dri-devel, linux-mm, lkml, nouveau
* Shakeel Butt [off-list ref] [210604 20:41]:
On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 1:49 PM Liam Howlett [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
* Shakeel Butt [off-list ref] [210525 19:45]:quoted
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 11:40 AM Liam Howlett [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
[...]quoted
quoted
+/* + * Walks the vma's mapping a page and mlocks the page if any locked vma's are + * found. Once one is found the page is locked and the scan can be terminated. + */Can you please add that this requires the mmap_sem() lock to the comments?Why does this require mmap_sem() lock? Also mmap_sem() lock of which mm_struct?Doesn't the mlock_vma_page() require the mmap_sem() for reading? The mm_struct in vma->vm_mm;We are traversing all the vmas where this page is mapped of possibly different mm_structs. I don't think we want to take mmap_sem() of all those mm_structs. The commit b87537d9e2fe ("mm: rmap use pte lock not mmap_sem to set PageMlocked") removed exactly that.quoted
From what I can see, at least the following paths have mmap_lock held for writing: munlock_vma_pages_range() from __do_munmap() munlokc_vma_pages_range() from remap_file_pages()The following path does not hold mmap_sem: exit_mmap() -> munlock_vma_pages_all() -> munlock_vma_pages_range().
Isn't this the benign race referenced by Hugh in the commit you point to below?
I would really suggest all to carefully read the commit message of
b87537d9e2fe ("mm: rmap use pte lock not mmap_sem to set
PageMlocked").
Particularly the following paragraph:
...
Vlastimil Babka points out another race which this patch protects against.
try_to_unmap_one() might reach its mlock_vma_page() TestSetPageMlocked a
moment after munlock_vma_pages_all() did its Phase 1 TestClearPageMlocked:
leaving PageMlocked and unevictable when it should be evictable. mmap_sem
is ineffective because exit_mmap() does not hold it; page lock ineffective
because __munlock_pagevec() only takes it afterwards, in Phase 2; pte lock
is effective because __munlock_pagevec_fill() takes it to get the page,
after VM_LOCKED was cleared from vm_flags, so visible to try_to_unmap_one.
...So this is saying the race with exit_mmap() isn't benign after all?
Alistair, please bring back the VM_LOCKED check with pte lock held and the comment "Holding pte lock, we do *not* need mmap_lock here". One positive outcome of this cleanup patch is the removal of unnecessary invalidation (unmapping for kvm case) of secondary mmus.