linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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