From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Nikita Kalyazin <kalyazin@amazon.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 01/17] userfaultfd: introduce mfill_copy_folio_locked() helper
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 12:45:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aYI0HmP-XZNBI-gb@x1.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260127192936.1250096-2-rppt@kernel.org>
On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 09:29:20PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@kernel.org>
>
> Split copying of data when locks held from mfill_atomic_pte_copy() into
> a helper function mfill_copy_folio_locked().
>
> This makes improves code readability and makes complex
> mfill_atomic_pte_copy() function easier to comprehend.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@kernel.org>
The movement looks all fine,
Acked-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Just one pure question to ask.
> ---
> mm/userfaultfd.c | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/userfaultfd.c b/mm/userfaultfd.c
> index e6dfd5f28acd..a0885d543f22 100644
> --- a/mm/userfaultfd.c
> +++ b/mm/userfaultfd.c
> @@ -238,6 +238,40 @@ int mfill_atomic_install_pte(pmd_t *dst_pmd,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int mfill_copy_folio_locked(struct folio *folio, unsigned long src_addr)
> +{
> + void *kaddr;
> + int ret;
> +
> + kaddr = kmap_local_folio(folio, 0);
> + /*
> + * The read mmap_lock is held here. Despite the
> + * mmap_lock being read recursive a deadlock is still
> + * possible if a writer has taken a lock. For example:
> + *
> + * process A thread 1 takes read lock on own mmap_lock
> + * process A thread 2 calls mmap, blocks taking write lock
> + * process B thread 1 takes page fault, read lock on own mmap lock
> + * process B thread 2 calls mmap, blocks taking write lock
> + * process A thread 1 blocks taking read lock on process B
> + * process B thread 1 blocks taking read lock on process A
While moving, I wonder if we need this complex use case to describe the
deadlock. Shouldn't this already happen with 1 process only?
process A thread 1 takes read lock (e.g. reaching here but
before copy_from_user)
process A thread 2 calls mmap, blocks taking write lock
process A thread 1 goes on copy_from_user(), trigger page fault,
then tries to re-take the read lock
IIUC above should already cause deadlock when rwsem prioritize the write
lock here.
> + *
> + * Disable page faults to prevent potential deadlock
> + * and retry the copy outside the mmap_lock.
> + */
> + pagefault_disable();
> + ret = copy_from_user(kaddr, (const void __user *) src_addr,
> + PAGE_SIZE);
> + pagefault_enable();
> + kunmap_local(kaddr);
> +
> + if (ret)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + flush_dcache_folio(folio);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static int mfill_atomic_pte_copy(pmd_t *dst_pmd,
> struct vm_area_struct *dst_vma,
> unsigned long dst_addr,
> @@ -245,7 +279,6 @@ static int mfill_atomic_pte_copy(pmd_t *dst_pmd,
> uffd_flags_t flags,
> struct folio **foliop)
> {
> - void *kaddr;
> int ret;
> struct folio *folio;
>
> @@ -256,27 +289,7 @@ static int mfill_atomic_pte_copy(pmd_t *dst_pmd,
> if (!folio)
> goto out;
>
> - kaddr = kmap_local_folio(folio, 0);
> - /*
> - * The read mmap_lock is held here. Despite the
> - * mmap_lock being read recursive a deadlock is still
> - * possible if a writer has taken a lock. For example:
> - *
> - * process A thread 1 takes read lock on own mmap_lock
> - * process A thread 2 calls mmap, blocks taking write lock
> - * process B thread 1 takes page fault, read lock on own mmap lock
> - * process B thread 2 calls mmap, blocks taking write lock
> - * process A thread 1 blocks taking read lock on process B
> - * process B thread 1 blocks taking read lock on process A
> - *
> - * Disable page faults to prevent potential deadlock
> - * and retry the copy outside the mmap_lock.
> - */
> - pagefault_disable();
> - ret = copy_from_user(kaddr, (const void __user *) src_addr,
> - PAGE_SIZE);
> - pagefault_enable();
> - kunmap_local(kaddr);
> + ret = mfill_copy_folio_locked(folio, src_addr);
>
> /* fallback to copy_from_user outside mmap_lock */
> if (unlikely(ret)) {
> @@ -285,8 +298,6 @@ static int mfill_atomic_pte_copy(pmd_t *dst_pmd,
> /* don't free the page */
> goto out;
> }
> -
> - flush_dcache_folio(folio);
> } else {
> folio = *foliop;
> *foliop = NULL;
> --
> 2.51.0
>
--
Peter Xu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-03 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-27 19:29 [PATCH RFC 00/17] mm, kvm: allow uffd suppot in guest_memfd Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 01/17] userfaultfd: introduce mfill_copy_folio_locked() helper Mike Rapoport
2026-02-03 17:45 ` Peter Xu [this message]
2026-02-08 9:49 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 02/17] userfaultfd: introduce struct mfill_state Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 03/17] userfaultfd: introduce mfill_get_pmd() helper Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 04/17] userfaultfd: introduce mfill_get_vma() and mfill_put_vma() Mike Rapoport
2026-02-02 21:49 ` Peter Xu
2026-02-08 9:54 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 05/17] userfaultfd: retry copying with locks dropped in mfill_atomic_pte_copy() Mike Rapoport
2026-02-02 21:23 ` Peter Xu
2026-02-08 10:01 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 06/17] userfaultfd: move vma_can_userfault out of line Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 07/17] userfaultfd: introduce vm_uffd_ops Mike Rapoport
2026-02-02 21:36 ` Peter Xu
2026-02-08 10:13 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-02-11 19:35 ` Peter Xu
2026-02-15 17:47 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-02-18 21:34 ` Peter Xu
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 08/17] userfaultfd, shmem: use a VMA callback to handle UFFDIO_CONTINUE Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 09/17] userfaultfd: introduce vm_uffd_ops->alloc_folio() Mike Rapoport
2026-02-02 22:13 ` Peter Xu
2026-02-08 10:22 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-02-11 19:37 ` Peter Xu
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 10/17] shmem, userfaultfd: implement shmem uffd operations using vm_uffd_ops Mike Rapoport
2026-02-03 17:40 ` Peter Xu
2026-02-08 10:35 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-02-11 20:00 ` Peter Xu
2026-02-15 17:45 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-02-18 21:45 ` Peter Xu
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 11/17] userfaultfd: mfill_atomic() remove retry logic Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 12/17] mm: introduce VM_FAULT_UFFD_MINOR fault reason Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 13/17] mm: introduce VM_FAULT_UFFD_MISSING " Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 14/17] KVM: guest_memfd: implement userfaultfd minor mode Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 15/17] KVM: guest_memfd: implement userfaultfd missing mode Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 16/17] KVM: selftests: test userfaultfd minor for guest_memfd Mike Rapoport
2026-01-27 19:29 ` [PATCH RFC 17/17] KVM: selftests: test userfaultfd missing " Mike Rapoport
2026-02-03 20:56 ` [PATCH RFC 00/17] mm, kvm: allow uffd suppot in guest_memfd Peter Xu
2026-02-09 15:35 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-02-11 6:04 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-02-11 9:52 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
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=aYI0HmP-XZNBI-gb@x1.local \
--to=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=kalyazin@amazon.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--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