From: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/11] mm/hmm: Remove racy protection against double-unregistration
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 01:08:37 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFqt6zarGTZeA+Dw_RT2WXwgoYhnKP28LGfc+CDZqNFRexEXoQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190523153436.19102-10-jgg@ziepe.ca>
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 9:05 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> wrote:
>
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
>
> No other register/unregister kernel API attempts to provide this kind of
> protection as it is inherently racy, so just drop it.
>
> Callers should provide their own protection, it appears nouveau already
> does, but just in case drop a debugging POISON.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
> ---
> mm/hmm.c | 9 ++-------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/hmm.c b/mm/hmm.c
> index 46872306f922bb..6c3b7398672c29 100644
> --- a/mm/hmm.c
> +++ b/mm/hmm.c
> @@ -286,18 +286,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(hmm_mirror_register);
> */
> void hmm_mirror_unregister(struct hmm_mirror *mirror)
> {
> - struct hmm *hmm = READ_ONCE(mirror->hmm);
> -
> - if (hmm == NULL)
> - return;
> + struct hmm *hmm = mirror->hmm;
How about remove struct hmm *hmm and replace the code like below -
down_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);
list_del_init(&mirror->list);
up_write(&mirror->hmm->mirrors_sem);
hmm_put(hmm);
memset(&mirror->hmm, POISON_INUSE, sizeof(mirror->hmm));
Similar to hmm_mirror_register().
> down_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
> list_del_init(&mirror->list);
> - /* To protect us against double unregister ... */
> - mirror->hmm = NULL;
> up_write(&hmm->mirrors_sem);
> -
> hmm_put(hmm);
> + memset(&mirror->hmm, POISON_INUSE, sizeof(mirror->hmm));
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(hmm_mirror_unregister);
>
> --
> 2.21.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-07 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-23 15:34 [RFC PATCH 00/11] mm/hmm: Various revisions from a locking/code review Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] mm/hmm: Fix use after free with struct hmm in the mmu notifiers Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-06 23:54 ` Ira Weiny
2019-06-07 14:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] mm/hmm: Use hmm_mirror not mm as an argument for hmm_register_range Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 18:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] mm/hmm: Hold a mmgrab from hmm to mm Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] mm/hmm: Simplify hmm_get_or_create and make it reliable Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 23:38 ` Ralph Campbell
2019-05-24 1:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 17:06 ` Ralph Campbell
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] mm/hmm: Improve locking around hmm->dead Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 13:40 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] mm/hmm: Remove duplicate condition test before wait_event_timeout Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] mm/hmm: Delete hmm_mirror_mm_is_alive() Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] mm/hmm: Use lockdep instead of comments Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 19:33 ` Souptick Joarder
2019-06-07 19:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 21:02 ` Souptick Joarder
2019-06-08 1:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] mm/hmm: Remove racy protection against double-unregistration Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 19:38 ` Souptick Joarder [this message]
2019-06-07 19:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 19:55 ` Souptick Joarder
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] mm/hmm: Poison hmm_range during unregister Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 20:13 ` Souptick Joarder
2019-06-07 20:18 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] mm/hmm: Do not use list*_rcu() for hmm->ranges Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-07 20:22 ` Souptick Joarder
2019-05-23 19:04 ` [RFC PATCH 00/11] mm/hmm: Various revisions from a locking/code review John Hubbard
2019-05-23 19:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-23 20:59 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 13:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 14:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 16:49 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 16:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 17:01 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 17:52 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 18:03 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 18:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 18:46 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-24 22:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-27 19:58 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-05-24 17:47 ` Ralph Campbell
2019-05-24 17:51 ` 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=CAFqt6zarGTZeA+Dw_RT2WXwgoYhnKP28LGfc+CDZqNFRexEXoQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jrdr.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=jgg@mellanox.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rcampbell@nvidia.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).