From: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] mm/madvise: remove redundant mmap_lock operations from process_madvise()
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 10:56:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250204185620.15928-1-sj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aeeac6f3-f828-4bee-966f-c8df41df30bc@lucifer.local>
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 16:53:17 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 05:30:58PM -0800, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > Optimize redundant mmap lock operations from process_madvise() by
> > directly doing the mmap locking first, and then the remaining works for
> > all ranges in the loop.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
[...]
> > --- a/mm/madvise.c
> > +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> > @@ -1752,9 +1752,26 @@ static ssize_t vector_madvise(struct mm_struct *mm, struct iov_iter *iter,
[...]
> > /*
> > * An madvise operation is attempting to restart the syscall,
> > * but we cannot proceed as it would not be correct to repeat
> > @@ -1776,6 +1793,7 @@ static ssize_t vector_madvise(struct mm_struct *mm, struct iov_iter *iter,
> > break;
> > iov_iter_advance(iter, iter_iov_len(iter));
> > }
> > + madvise_unlock(mm, behavior);
> >
> > ret = (total_len - iov_iter_count(iter)) ? : ret;
>
> So I think this is now wrong because of the work I did recently. In this code:
>
> /*
> * An madvise operation is attempting to restart the syscall,
> * but we cannot proceed as it would not be correct to repeat
> * the operation in aggregate, and would be surprising to the
> * user.
> *
> * As we have already dropped locks, it is safe to just loop and
> * try again. We check for fatal signals in case we need exit
> * early anyway.
> */
> if (ret == -ERESTARTNOINTR) {
> if (fatal_signal_pending(current)) {
> ret = -EINTR;
> break;
> }
> continue;
> }
>
> Note that it assumes the locks have been dropped before simply trying
> again, as the only way this would happen is because of a race, and we may
> end up stuck in a loop if we just hold on to the lock.
Nice catch!
>
> So I'd suggest updating this comment and changing the code like this:
>
> if (ret == -ERESTARTNOINTR) {
> if (fatal_signal_pending(current)) {
> ret = -EINTR;
> break;
> }
>
> + /* Drop and reacquire lock to unwind race. */
> + madvise_unlock(mm, behaviour);
> + madvise_lock(mm, behaviour);
> continue;
> }
>
> Which brings back the existing behaviour.
Thank you for this kind suggestion. I will update next version of this patch
in this way.
>
> By the way I hate that this function swallows error codes. But that's not
> your fault, and is now established user-facing behaviour so yeah. Big sigh.
>
> >
> > --
> > 2.39.5
Thanks,
SJ
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-04 18:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-17 1:30 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] " SeongJae Park
2025-01-17 1:30 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] mm/madvise: split out mmap locking operations for madvise() SeongJae Park
2025-01-29 19:18 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-01-31 15:58 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-01-31 17:33 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2025-01-17 1:30 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] mm/madvise: split out madvise input validity check SeongJae Park
2025-01-29 19:18 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-01-31 16:01 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-01-31 19:19 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2025-01-17 1:30 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] mm/madvise: split out madvise() behavior execution SeongJae Park
2025-01-29 19:19 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-01-31 16:10 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-01-17 1:30 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] mm/madvise: remove redundant mmap_lock operations from process_madvise() SeongJae Park
2025-01-29 19:20 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-01-31 16:53 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-01-31 17:31 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2025-01-31 17:47 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-01-31 17:51 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-01-31 17:58 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2025-02-04 19:53 ` SeongJae Park
2025-02-06 6:28 ` SeongJae Park
2025-05-17 19:28 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-05-19 18:25 ` SeongJae Park
2025-01-31 19:17 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-02-04 18:56 ` SeongJae Park [this message]
2025-01-29 19:22 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] " Shakeel Butt
2025-01-29 21:09 ` SeongJae Park
2025-01-31 16:04 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-01-31 16:30 ` SeongJae Park
2025-01-31 16:55 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-01-31 17:53 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
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=20250204185620.15928-1-sj@kernel.org \
--to=sj@kernel.org \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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