From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@Oracle.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@google.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com"
<kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/mmap: Don't unlock VMAs in remap_file_pages()
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 11:05:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <91483d71-a12d-1e52-e9c9-135404c5219f@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201216204252.vh3zadk4ghbzufqz@revolver>
On 16.12.20 21:42, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>
> Thank you for looking at this. I appreciate the scrutiny.
>
> * David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> [201216 09:58]:
>> On 15.12.20 16:54, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>>> do_mmap() will unlock the necessary VMAs. There is also a bug in the
>>> loop which will evaluate as false and not unlock any VMAs anyways.
>>
>> If there is a BUG, do we have a Fixes: tag? Also
>
> The bug would never show up as it is masked by do_mmap() unlocking the
> necessary range. Although there is a bug in this code, the code does
> not cause an issue as it won't execute so should I have a Fixes tag?
> The code works and what I've done is remove a chunk of code that never
> runs.
>
Ok I see. The use of "bug" here is misleading. The unnecessary code is
simply not doing what it promised to do without doing any harm.
>>
>> 1. Can we fix the bug separately first?
>
> I think it is safer to remove unexecuted code than enable it and then
> remove it.
I agree, as it is not actually a bug.
>
>> 2. Can we have a better description on what the bug actually is
>> "evaluate as false"? What is the result of the bug?
>
> The bug is in the for loop test expression that I removed in the patch.
> Here is the long explaination of why the loop has never run.
>
>
> Line 2982: if (start + size <= start
> Line 2983: goto out;
>
> size is positive.
>
> Line 2992: vma = find_vma(mm, start);
> Look up the first VMA which satisfies start < vm_end
>
> Line 2997: if (start < vma->vm_start)
> Line 2998: goto out;
>
> So now vma->vm_start >= start.
> If vma->vm_start > start, then there are no VMAs in that area, otherwise
> it would have been returned by find_vma().
> So we can say that vma->vm_start == start.
>
> Line 3033: for (tmp = vma; tmp->vm_start >= start + size;
> Line 3034: tmp = tmp->vm_next) {
> This is the for loop with the error in the test expression.
>
> tmp->vm_start == start which cannot be >= (start + size).
>
> I believe the intention was to loop through vmas in the range of start
> to (start + size) and unlock them.
>
>
> The result of the bug is no VMA is unlocked in this fuction. But that
> doesn't matter as they are unlocked later in the call chain - which is
> why this code works as intended.
>
Thanks for clarifying!
>
>>
>> CCing some people that might know if this is actually a sane change.
>> Skimming over do_mmap(), it's not immediately clear to me that
>> "do_mmap() will unlock the necessary VMAs".
>
> Ah, yes. That is understandable.
>
> do_mmap() L1583 -> mmap_region() L1752 -> munmap_vma_range() ->
> do_munmap() -> __do_munmap() loop at 2891 to unlock the range.
>
> Would you like me to add this call chain to the changelog?
Yes please, in a simplified form.
I suggest something like the following patch description:
"do_mmap(MAP_FIXED) will already unlock pages via munmap_vma_range(). We
can remove the superfluous manual unlocking in remap_file_pages().
Note that the manual unlocking is even incorrect, as it might miss
unlocking some pages - no harm done.
"
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-17 10:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-15 15:54 [PATCH v2] mm/mmap: Don't unlock VMAs in remap_file_pages() Liam R. Howlett
2020-12-16 14:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-12-16 20:42 ` Liam R. Howlett
2020-12-16 21:33 ` Hugh Dickins
2020-12-17 10:05 ` David Hildenbrand [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:
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=91483d71-a12d-1e52-e9c9-135404c5219f@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@Oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@google.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).