From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f52.google.com (mail-qg0-f52.google.com [209.85.192.52]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 163906B0254 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:10:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id y9so123372264qgd.3 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:10:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 19:10:19 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/18] exec: make exec path waiting for mmap_sem killable Message-ID: <20160229181018.GF3615@redhat.com> References: <1456752417-9626-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <1456752417-9626-14-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <20160229172333.GB3615@redhat.com> <20160229174739.GL16930@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160229174739.GL16930@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: LKML , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, Alex Deucher , Alex Thorlton , Andrea Arcangeli , Andy Lutomirski , Benjamin LaHaise , Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , Daniel Vetter , Dave Hansen , David Airlie , Davidlohr Bueso , David Rientjes , "H . Peter Anvin" , Hugh Dickins , Ingo Molnar , Johannes Weiner , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Konstantin Khlebnikov , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman , Peter Zijlstra , Petr Cermak , Thomas Gleixner , Alexander Viro On 02/29, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 29-02-16 18:23:34, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 02/29, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > @@ -267,7 +267,10 @@ static int __bprm_mm_init(struct linux_binprm *bprm) > > > if (!vma) > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > > > - down_write(&mm->mmap_sem); > > > + if (down_write_killable(&mm->mmap_sem)) { > > > + err = -EINTR; > > > + goto err_free; > > > + } > > > vma->vm_mm = mm; > > > > I won't argue, but this looks unnecessary. Nobody else can see this new mm, > > down_write() can't block. > > > > In fact I think we can just remove down_write/up_write here. Except perhaps > > there is lockdep_assert_held() somewhere in these paths. > > This is what I had initially but then I've noticed that mm_alloc() does > mm_init(current)->init_new_context(current) yes, and init_new_context() is arch dependant... > code doesn't seem much harder to follow, the callers are already > handling all error paths so I guess it would be better to simply move on > this. Yes, agreed, please forget. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org