Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 3 authors, 2007-07-19

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 Polyakov
Thanks,
Dan
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help