All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
	Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
	John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/11] mm/hmm: Improve locking around hmm->dead
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 10:40:35 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190524134035.GA12653@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190523153436.19102-6-jgg@ziepe.ca>

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 12:34:30PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
> 
> This value is being read without any locking, so it is just an unreliable
> hint, however in many cases we need to have certainty that code is not
> racing with mmput()/hmm_release().
> 
> For the two functions doing find_vma(), document that the caller is
> expected to hold mmap_sem and thus also have a mmget().
> 
> For hmm_range_register acquire a mmget internally as it must not race with
> hmm_release() when it sets valid.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
>  mm/hmm.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/hmm.c b/mm/hmm.c
> index ec54be54d81135..d97ec293336ea5 100644
> +++ b/mm/hmm.c
> @@ -909,8 +909,10 @@ int hmm_range_register(struct hmm_range *range,
>  	range->start = start;
>  	range->end = end;
>  
> -	/* Check if hmm_mm_destroy() was call. */
> -	if (mirror->hmm->mm == NULL || mirror->hmm->dead)
> +	/*
> +	 * We cannot set range->value to true if hmm_release has already run.
> +	 */
> +	if (!mmget_not_zero(mirror->hmm->mm))
>  		return -EFAULT;
>  
>  	range->hmm = mirror->hmm;
> @@ -928,6 +930,7 @@ int hmm_range_register(struct hmm_range *range,
>  	if (!range->hmm->notifiers)
>  		range->valid = true;
>  	mutex_unlock(&range->hmm->lock);
> +	mmput(mirror->hmm->mm);

Hi Jerome, when you revised this patch to move the mmput to
hmm_range_unregister() it means hmm_release() cannot run while a range
exists, and thus we can have this futher simplification rolled into
this patch. Can you update your git? Thanks:

diff --git a/mm/hmm.c b/mm/hmm.c
index 2a08b78550b90d..ddd05f2ebe739a 100644
--- a/mm/hmm.c
+++ b/mm/hmm.c
@@ -128,17 +128,17 @@ static void hmm_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
 {
 	struct hmm *hmm = container_of(mn, struct hmm, mmu_notifier);
 	struct hmm_mirror *mirror;
-	struct hmm_range *range;
 
 	/* hmm is in progress to free */
 	if (!kref_get_unless_zero(&hmm->kref))
 		return;
 
-	/* Wake-up everyone waiting on any range. */
 	mutex_lock(&hmm->lock);
-	list_for_each_entry(range, &hmm->ranges, list)
-		range->valid = false;
-	wake_up_all(&hmm->wq);
+	/*
+	 * Since hmm_range_register() holds the mmget() lock hmm_release() is
+	 * prevented as long as a range exists.
+	 */
+	WARN_ON(!list_empty(&hmm->ranges));
 	mutex_unlock(&hmm->lock);
 
 	down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
@@ -908,9 +908,7 @@ int hmm_range_register(struct hmm_range *range,
 	range->hmm = mm->hmm;
 	kref_get(&range->hmm->kref);
 
-	/*
-	 * We cannot set range->value to true if hmm_release has already run.
-	 */
+	/* Prevent hmm_release() from running while the range is valid */
 	if (!mmget_not_zero(mm))
 		return -EFAULT;
 


  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-24 13:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-23 15:34 [RFC PATCH 00/11] mm/hmm: Various revisions from a locking/code review Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] mm/hmm: Fix use after free with struct hmm in the mmu notifiers Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-06 23:54   ` Ira Weiny
2019-06-07 14:17     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] mm/hmm: Use hmm_mirror not mm as an argument for hmm_register_range Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 18:22   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] mm/hmm: Hold a mmgrab from hmm to mm Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] mm/hmm: Simplify hmm_get_or_create and make it reliable Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 23:38   ` Ralph Campbell
2019-05-24  1:23     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 17:06       ` Ralph Campbell
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] mm/hmm: Improve locking around hmm->dead Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 13:40   ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] mm/hmm: Remove duplicate condition test before wait_event_timeout Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] mm/hmm: Delete hmm_mirror_mm_is_alive() Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] mm/hmm: Use lockdep instead of comments Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 19:33   ` Souptick Joarder
2019-06-07 19:39     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 21:02       ` Souptick Joarder
2019-06-08  1:15         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] mm/hmm: Remove racy protection against double-unregistration Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 19:38   ` Souptick Joarder
2019-06-07 19:37     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 19:55       ` Souptick Joarder
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] mm/hmm: Poison hmm_range during unregister Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 20:13   ` Souptick Joarder
2019-06-07 20:18     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] mm/hmm: Do not use list*_rcu() for hmm->ranges Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 20:22   ` Souptick Joarder
2019-05-23 19:04 ` [RFC PATCH 00/11] mm/hmm: Various revisions from a locking/code review John Hubbard
2019-05-23 19:37   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 20:59   ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 13:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 14:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 16:49   ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 16:59     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 17:01       ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 17:52         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 18:03           ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 18:32             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 18:46               ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 22:09                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-27 19:58                   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 17:47     ` Ralph Campbell
2019-05-24 17:51       ` Jerome Glisse

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=20190524134035.GA12653@ziepe.ca \
    --to=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rcampbell@nvidia.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.