From: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.ibm.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Liam Howlett <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] mmap locking API: add mmap_read_release() and mmap_read_unlock_non_owner()
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 22:09:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANN689Hr972e_0+kujGxXPbCVTd7xnpBPZXDk2T3dwARnWENVQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200327044647.wgfsmjy37n72dixe@linux-p48b>
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 9:48 PM Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2020, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>
> >Add a couple APIs to allow splitting mmap_read_unlock() into two calls:
> >- mmap_read_release(), called by the task that had taken the mmap lock;
> >- mmap_read_unlock_non_owner(), called from a work queue.
> >
> >These apis are used by kernel/bpf/stackmap.c only.
>
> I'm not crazy about the idea generalizing such calls into an mm api.
> We try to stay away from non-owner semantics in locking - granted
> the IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) warning, but still.
>
> Could this give future users the wrong impression? What about just
> using rwsem calls directly in bpf?
I see what you mean and I certainly don't want to encourage any new
non-owner call sites to appear.... This bpf stackmap site is a small
pain point in my larger range locking patchset too.
I am not sure what is the proper response to it; the opposite side of
your argument could be that using a direct rwsem call there hides the
issue and makes it less likely for someone to fix it ? I don't have a
very strong opinion on this, as I think it can be argued either way...
But at a minimum, I think it'd be worth adding a comment asking people
not to add new call sites to the mmap_read_release() and
mmap_read_unlock_non_owner() APIs ?
--
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-27 5:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-27 2:10 [PATCH v2 00/10] Add a new mmap locking API wrapping mmap_sem calls Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] mmap locking API: initial implementation as rwsem wrappers Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 12:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-03-27 21:52 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 21:52 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] MMU notifier: use the new mmap locking API Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] DMA reservations: " Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] mmap locking API: use coccinelle to convert mmap_sem rwsem call sites Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 7:22 ` Markus Elfring
2020-03-27 7:22 ` [Cocci] " Markus Elfring
2020-03-27 7:44 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 7:44 ` [Cocci] " Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 7:44 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 8:00 ` [v2 " Markus Elfring
2020-03-27 8:00 ` [Cocci] " Markus Elfring
2020-03-27 8:08 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 8:08 ` [Cocci] " Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 8:08 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] mmap locking API: convert mmap_sem call sites missed by coccinelle Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 8:21 ` Markus Elfring
2020-03-27 8:21 ` [Cocci] " Markus Elfring
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] mmap locking API: convert nested write lock sites Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] mmap locking API: add mmap_read_release() and mmap_read_unlock_non_owner() Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 4:46 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2020-03-27 5:09 ` Michel Lespinasse [this message]
2020-03-27 5:09 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] mmap locking API: add MMAP_LOCK_INITIALIZER Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] mmap locking API: use lockdep_assert_held Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 4:48 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2020-03-27 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] mmap locking API: rename mmap_sem to mmap_lock Michel Lespinasse
2020-03-27 2:10 ` Michel Lespinasse
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=CANN689Hr972e_0+kujGxXPbCVTd7xnpBPZXDk2T3dwARnWENVQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=walken@google.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=ldufour@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yinghan@google.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.