Re: kmap_atomic() oopses in current mainline
From: Dan Williams <hidden>
Date: 2007-07-19 15:23:02
Also in:
linux-kernel-announce
On 7/19/07, Evgeniy Polyakov [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 02:38:31AM -0700, Andrew Morton (akpm@linux-foundation.org) wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
is very wrong if both ASYNC_TX_KMAP_DST and ASYNC_TX_KMAP_SRC can ever be set. We'll end up using the same kmap slot for both src add dest and we get either corrupted data or a BUG.So far it can not since the only user is raid code, which only allows to perform either reading from bio or writing into one, which requires only one mapping.hm, so we got lucky?I would say it was intentionally, current code can perform only one operation in a time. Of course changing KM_USER from 0 to 1 in second kmap_atomic will not force oceans to run out of coasts. Kind of:diff --git a/crypto/async_tx/async_memcpy.c b/crypto/async_tx/async_memcpy.c index a973f4e..a48c7f3 100644 --- a/crypto/async_tx/async_memcpy.c +++ b/crypto/async_tx/async_memcpy.c@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ async_memcpy(struct page *dest, struct page *src, unsigned int dest_offset, dest_buf = page_address(dest) + dest_offset; if (flags & ASYNC_TX_KMAP_SRC) - src_buf = kmap_atomic(src, KM_USER0) + src_offset; + src_buf = kmap_atomic(src, KM_USER1) + src_offset; else src_buf = page_address(src) + src_offset;@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ async_memcpy(struct page *dest, struct page *src, unsigned int dest_offset, kunmap_atomic(dest_buf, KM_USER0); if (flags & ASYNC_TX_KMAP_SRC) - kunmap_atomic(src_buf, KM_USER0); + kunmap_atomic(src_buf, KM_USER1); async_tx_sync_epilog(flags, depend_tx, cb_fn, cb_param); }quoted
quoted
Btw, shouldn't it always be kmap_atomic() even if flag is not set. That pages are usual one returned by alloc_page().The code would work OK if the kmap_atomic()s were unconditional, but it would be a bit more expensive if the page is in highmem and we don't actually intend to access it with the CPU. kmap_atomic() against a non-highmem page is basically free: just an additional test_bit().
Always kmap'ing the page is the way to go, since in this path the page is always accessed with the CPU. This also allows these ASYNC_TX_ flags to be killed off as they are not necessary. I'll cook up a patch, and be more careful about my kmap usage going forward.
As far as I recall there was an intention to do async memory copy to
userspace, so likely kmapping is a good idea.
--
Evgeniy PolyakovThanks, Dan