Linux-mm Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Pengfei Li <>
To: Hugh Dickins <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, util: account_locked_vm() does not hold mmap_lock
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2020 19:07:24 +0800
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2007291121280.4649@eggly.anvils>

On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 12:21:11 -0700 (PDT)
Hugh Dickins <> wrote:

Sorry for the late reply.

> On Sun, 26 Jul 2020, Pengfei Li wrote:
> > Since mm->locked_vm is already an atomic counter,
> > account_locked_vm() does not need to hold mmap_lock.  
> I am worried that this patch, already added to mmotm, along with its
> 1/2 making locked_vm an atomic64, might be rushed into v5.9 with just
> that two-line commit description, and no discussion at all.
> locked_vm belongs fundamentally to mm/mlock.c, and the lock to guard
> it is mmap_lock; and mlock() has some complicated stuff to do under
> that lock while it decides how to adjust locked_vm.
> It is very easy to convert an unsigned long to an atomic64_t, but
> "atomic read, check limit and do stuff, atomic add" does not give
> the same guarantee as holding the right lock around it all.
> (At the very least, __account_locked_vm() in 1/2 should be changed to
> replace its atomic64_add by an atomic64_cmpxchg, to enforce the limit
> that it just checked.  But that will be no more than lipstick on a
> pig, when the right lock that everyone else agrees upon is not being
> held.)

Thank you for your detailed comment.

You are right, I should use atomic64_cmpxchg to guarantee the limit of

> Now, it can be argued that our locked_vm and pinned_vm maintenance
> is so random and deficient, and too difficult to keep right across
> a sprawl of drivers, that we should just be grateful for those that
> do volunteer to subject themselves to RLIMIT_MEMLOCK limitation,
> and never mind if it's a little racy.
> And it may well be that all those who have made considerable efforts
> in the past to improve the situation, have more interesting things to
> devote their time to, and would prefer not to get dragged back here.
> But let's at least give this a little more visibility, and hope
> to hear opinions one way or the other from those who care.

Thank you. My patch should be more thoughtful.

I will send an email to Stephen soon asking to remove these two patches
from -mm tree.


      parent reply index

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-26  8:02 [PATCH 1/2] mm: make mm->locked_vm an atomic64 counter Pengfei Li
2020-07-26  8:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, util: account_locked_vm() does not hold mmap_lock Pengfei Li
2020-07-29 19:21   ` Hugh Dickins
2020-07-30 20:57     ` Daniel Jordan
2020-08-02 11:23       ` Pengfei Li
2020-08-02 11:07     ` Pengfei Li [this message]

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-mm Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror linux-mm/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-mm linux-mm/ \
	public-inbox-index linux-mm

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone