All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
To: <jglisse@redhat.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	Evgeny Baskakov <ebaskakov@nvidia.com>,
	Mark Hairgrove <mhairgrove@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] mm/hmm: HMM should have a callback before MM is destroyed v2
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 20:47:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b0cd570b-dfe4-4b42-18bb-967d1dbddcb3@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7e87c1f9-5c1a-84fd-1f7f-55ffaaed8a66@nvidia.com>

On 03/16/2018 07:36 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 03/16/2018 12:14 PM, jglisse@redhat.com wrote:
>> From: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>
>>
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> +static void hmm_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
>> +{
>> +	struct hmm *hmm = mm->hmm;
>> +	struct hmm_mirror *mirror;
>> +	struct hmm_mirror *mirror_next;
>> +
>> +	down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
>> +	list_for_each_entry_safe(mirror, mirror_next, &hmm->mirrors, list) {
>> +		list_del_init(&mirror->list);
>> +		if (mirror->ops->release)
>> +			mirror->ops->release(mirror);
>> +	}
>> +	up_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
>> +}
>> +
> 
> OK, as for actual code review:
> 
> This part of the locking looks good. However, I think it can race against
> hmm_mirror_register(), because hmm_mirror_register() will just add a new 
> mirror regardless.
> 
> So:
> 
> thread 1                                      thread 2
> --------------                                -----------------
> hmm_release                                   hmm_mirror_register 
>     down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);                <blocked: waiting for sem>
>         // deletes all list items
>     up_write
>                                                   unblocked: adds new mirror
>                                               
> 
> ...so I think we need a way to back out of any pending hmm_mirror_register()
> calls, as part of the .release steps, right? It seems hard for the device driver,
> which could be inside of hmm_mirror_register(), to handle that. Especially considering
> that right now, hmm_mirror_register() will return success in this case--so
> there is no indication that anything is wrong.
> 
> Maybe hmm_mirror_register() could return an error (and not add to the mirror list),
> in such a situation, how's that sound?
> 

In other words, I think this would help (not tested yet beyond a quick compile,
but it's pretty simple):

diff --git a/mm/hmm.c b/mm/hmm.c
index 7ccca5478ea1..da39f8522dca 100644
--- a/mm/hmm.c
+++ b/mm/hmm.c
@@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ struct hmm {
        struct list_head        mirrors;
        struct mmu_notifier     mmu_notifier;
        struct rw_semaphore     mirrors_sem;
+       bool                    shutting_down;
 };
 
 /*
@@ -99,6 +100,7 @@ static struct hmm *hmm_register(struct mm_struct *mm)
        INIT_LIST_HEAD(&hmm->ranges);
        spin_lock_init(&hmm->lock);
        hmm->mm = mm;
+       hmm->shutting_down = false;
 
        /*
         * We should only get here if hold the mmap_sem in write mode ie on
@@ -167,6 +169,7 @@ static void hmm_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
        struct hmm_mirror *mirror_next;
 
        down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
+       hmm->shutting_down = true;
        list_for_each_entry_safe(mirror, mirror_next, &hmm->mirrors, list) {
                list_del_init(&mirror->list);
                if (mirror->ops->release)
@@ -227,6 +230,10 @@ int hmm_mirror_register(struct hmm_mirror *mirror, struct mm_struct *mm)
                return -ENOMEM;
 
        down_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);
+       if (mirror->hmm->shutting_down) {
+               up_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);
+               return -ESRCH;
+       }
        list_add(&mirror->list, &mirror->hmm->mirrors);
        up_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
To: jglisse@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, Evgeny Baskakov <ebaskakov@nvidia.com>,
	Mark Hairgrove <mhairgrove@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] mm/hmm: HMM should have a callback before MM is destroyed v2
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 20:47:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b0cd570b-dfe4-4b42-18bb-967d1dbddcb3@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7e87c1f9-5c1a-84fd-1f7f-55ffaaed8a66@nvidia.com>

On 03/16/2018 07:36 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 03/16/2018 12:14 PM, jglisse@redhat.com wrote:
>> From: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>
>>
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> +static void hmm_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
>> +{
>> +	struct hmm *hmm = mm->hmm;
>> +	struct hmm_mirror *mirror;
>> +	struct hmm_mirror *mirror_next;
>> +
>> +	down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
>> +	list_for_each_entry_safe(mirror, mirror_next, &hmm->mirrors, list) {
>> +		list_del_init(&mirror->list);
>> +		if (mirror->ops->release)
>> +			mirror->ops->release(mirror);
>> +	}
>> +	up_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
>> +}
>> +
> 
> OK, as for actual code review:
> 
> This part of the locking looks good. However, I think it can race against
> hmm_mirror_register(), because hmm_mirror_register() will just add a new 
> mirror regardless.
> 
> So:
> 
> thread 1                                      thread 2
> --------------                                -----------------
> hmm_release                                   hmm_mirror_register 
>     down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);                <blocked: waiting for sem>
>         // deletes all list items
>     up_write
>                                                   unblocked: adds new mirror
>                                               
> 
> ...so I think we need a way to back out of any pending hmm_mirror_register()
> calls, as part of the .release steps, right? It seems hard for the device driver,
> which could be inside of hmm_mirror_register(), to handle that. Especially considering
> that right now, hmm_mirror_register() will return success in this case--so
> there is no indication that anything is wrong.
> 
> Maybe hmm_mirror_register() could return an error (and not add to the mirror list),
> in such a situation, how's that sound?
> 

In other words, I think this would help (not tested yet beyond a quick compile,
but it's pretty simple):

diff --git a/mm/hmm.c b/mm/hmm.c
index 7ccca5478ea1..da39f8522dca 100644
--- a/mm/hmm.c
+++ b/mm/hmm.c
@@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ struct hmm {
        struct list_head        mirrors;
        struct mmu_notifier     mmu_notifier;
        struct rw_semaphore     mirrors_sem;
+       bool                    shutting_down;
 };
 
 /*
@@ -99,6 +100,7 @@ static struct hmm *hmm_register(struct mm_struct *mm)
        INIT_LIST_HEAD(&hmm->ranges);
        spin_lock_init(&hmm->lock);
        hmm->mm = mm;
+       hmm->shutting_down = false;
 
        /*
         * We should only get here if hold the mmap_sem in write mode ie on
@@ -167,6 +169,7 @@ static void hmm_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, struct mm_struct *mm)
        struct hmm_mirror *mirror_next;
 
        down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
+       hmm->shutting_down = true;
        list_for_each_entry_safe(mirror, mirror_next, &hmm->mirrors, list) {
                list_del_init(&mirror->list);
                if (mirror->ops->release)
@@ -227,6 +230,10 @@ int hmm_mirror_register(struct hmm_mirror *mirror, struct mm_struct *mm)
                return -ENOMEM;
 
        down_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);
+       if (mirror->hmm->shutting_down) {
+               up_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);
+               return -ESRCH;
+       }
        list_add(&mirror->list, &mirror->hmm->mirrors);
        up_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-17  3:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-16 19:14 [PATCH 0/4] hmm: fixes and documentations v2 jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14 ` jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 01/14] mm/hmm: documentation editorial update to HMM documentation jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 02/14] mm/hmm: fix header file if/else/endif maze jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-16 21:09   ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-16 21:18     ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-16 21:18       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-16 21:18       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-16 21:35       ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-16 21:40         ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 21:40           ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  1:20   ` [PATCH 02/14] mm/hmm: fix header file if/else/endif maze v2 jglisse
2018-03-17  1:20     ` jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 03/14] mm/hmm: HMM should have a callback before MM is destroyed v2 jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-16 21:12   ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-16 21:26     ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-16 21:26       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-16 21:26       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-16 21:37       ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 21:37         ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  2:36   ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  2:36     ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  3:47     ` John Hubbard [this message]
2018-03-17  3:47       ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  4:39       ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  4:39         ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 04/14] mm/hmm: hmm_pfns_bad() was accessing wrong struct jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-17  2:04   ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  2:04     ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 05/14] mm/hmm: use struct for hmm_vma_fault(), hmm_vma_get_pfns() parameters jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-17  3:08   ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  3:08     ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 06/14] mm/hmm: remove HMM_PFN_READ flag and ignore peculiar architecture jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-17  3:30   ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  3:30     ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 07/14] mm/hmm: use uint64_t for HMM pfn instead of defining hmm_pfn_t to ulong jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-17  3:59   ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  3:59     ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 08/14] mm/hmm: cleanup special vma handling (VM_SPECIAL) jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-17  4:35   ` John Hubbard
2018-03-17  4:35     ` John Hubbard
2018-03-16 19:14 ` [PATCH 09/14] mm/hmm: do not differentiate between empty entry or missing directory jglisse
2018-03-16 19:14   ` jglisse
2018-03-19 23:06   ` John Hubbard
2018-03-19 23:06     ` John Hubbard
2018-03-20  2:08     ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-20  2:08       ` 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=b0cd570b-dfe4-4b42-18bb-967d1dbddcb3@nvidia.com \
    --to=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ebaskakov@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhairgrove@nvidia.com \
    --cc=rcampbell@nvidia.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.