From: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: remove unintentional voluntary preemption in get_mmap_lock_carefully
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2023 15:00:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230820130004.knx42tyeshps4vdg@f> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wh=cECn7SLr31VXwtJq-wYnt5+VcERnvAmEVktdEKqR=w@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 02:47:41PM +0200, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Aug 2023 at 14:41, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wrote:
> > My first patch looked like this:
>
> Well, that's disgusting and strange.
>
> > - might_sleep();
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP)
> > + __might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__);
> > +#endif
>
> Why would you have that strange #ifdef? __might_sleep() just goes away
> without that debug option anyway.
>
> But without that odd ifdef, I think it's fine.
>
Heh, I wrote the patch last night and I could swear it failed to compile
without the ifdef.
That said I think it looks more than disgusting and I'm happy to confirm
it does build both ways.
That said:
mm: remove unintentional voluntary preemption in get_mmap_lock_carefully
Should the trylock succeed (and thus blocking was avoided), the routine
wants to ensure blocking was still legal to do. However, might_sleep()
ends up calling __cond_resched() injecting a voluntary preemption point
with the freshly acquired lock.
__might_sleep() instead to only get the asserts.
Found while checking off-CPU time during kernel build (like so:
"offcputime-bpfcc -Ku"), sample backtrace:
finish_task_switch.isra.0
__schedule
__cond_resched
lock_mm_and_find_vma
do_user_addr_fault
exc_page_fault
asm_exc_page_fault
- sh (4502)
10
Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
---
mm/memory.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index 1ec1ef3418bf..d82316a8a48b 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -5259,7 +5259,7 @@ static inline bool get_mmap_lock_carefully(struct mm_struct *mm, struct pt_regs
{
/* Even if this succeeds, make it clear we *might* have slept */
if (likely(mmap_read_trylock(mm))) {
- might_sleep();
+ __might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__);
return true;
}
--
2.39.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-20 13:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-20 10:43 Mateusz Guzik
2023-08-20 11:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-20 12:41 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-08-20 12:46 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-08-20 12:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-08-20 12:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-08-20 13:08 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-08-20 13:00 ` Mateusz Guzik [this message]
2023-08-20 18:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-21 1:13 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-08-21 3:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-21 4:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-08-21 5:38 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20230820130004.knx42tyeshps4vdg@f \
--to=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.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