From: 'David Gibson' <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>, g@ozlabs.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
'Christoph Lameter' <christoph@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
bill.irwin@oracle.com, Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] reduce hugetlb_instantiation_mutex usage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:17:04 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061031031703.GA7220@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000001c6fc97$ecd8cbd0$ff0da8c0@amr.corp.intel.com>
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 06:54:46PM -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> David Gibson wrote on Thursday, October 26, 2006 9:06 PM
> > > Alternatively, we could put the page into pagecache whether or not the
> > > mapping is MAP_SHARED. Then pull it out again prior to unlocking it if
> > > it's MAP_PRIVATE. So we're using pagecache just as a way for the
> > > concurrent faulter to locate the page.
> >
> > Hrm.. interesting if we can make it work. I'd be worried about cases
> > with concurrent PRIVATE and SHARED pages on the same file offset.
>
> I got side tracked on to the radix-tree stuff. The comments in
> hugetlb_no_page() make me wonder whether we have a race issue on
> private mapping:
>
> /*
> * Use page lock to guard against racing truncation
> * before we get page_table_lock.
> */
>
> Private mapping won't use radix tree during instantiation. What protects
> racy truncate against fault in that scenario? Don't we have a bug here?
Not at present, because the hugetlb_instantiation_mutex protects both
fault paths. But with Andrew's patch as it stands, yes. As I said in
a previous email. The libhugetlbfs testsuite now has a testcase for
the MAP_PRIVATE as well as the MAP_SHARED version of the race.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-31 3:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-26 22:17 Chen, Kenneth W
2006-10-26 22:44 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-26 23:31 ` 'David Gibson'
2006-10-27 0:04 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-27 3:11 ` 'David Gibson'
2006-10-27 3:35 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-27 4:06 ` 'David Gibson'
2006-10-31 2:54 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-10-31 3:17 ` 'David Gibson' [this message]
2006-10-31 5:15 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-10-31 11:05 ` 'David Gibson'
2006-10-31 12:48 ` Hugh Dickins
2006-11-01 6:18 ` Nick Piggin
2006-11-01 10:17 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-11-02 3:06 ` Nick Piggin
2006-11-02 2:29 ` 'David Gibson'
2006-10-27 1:47 ` 'David Gibson'
2006-10-30 20:55 ` Adam Litke
2006-10-26 23:47 ` 'David Gibson'
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061031031703.GA7220@localhost.localdomain \
--to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=agl@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bill.irwin@oracle.com \
--cc=christoph@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--cc=g@ozlabs.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox