From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Do we need to unrevert "fs: do not prefault sys_write() user buffer pages"?
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 08:32:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgM0ZMqY9fuYx0H6UninvbZjMyJeL=7Zz4=AmtO98QncA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3221175.1624375240@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Note this part:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 8:20 AM David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> copied = iov_iter_copy_from_user_atomic(page, i, offset, bytes);
The "atomic" is the key thing.
The fault_in_readable is just an optimistic "let's make things be mapped".
But yes, it could get unmapped again before the actual copy happens
with the lock held. But that's why the copy is using that atomic
version, so if that happens, we'll end up repeating.
Honestly, the first part comment above the
iov_iter_fault_in_readable() is a bit misleading (the deadlock would
be real _except_ for the atomic part), and it would logically make
sense to only do this for when the actual atomic copy_from_user_atomic
fails. But then you'd have to fault things twice if you do fault.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-22 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-22 15:20 Do we need to unrevert "fs: do not prefault sys_write() user buffer pages"? David Howells
2021-06-22 15:27 ` Al Viro
2021-06-22 15:36 ` Al Viro
2021-06-22 17:25 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-06-22 17:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-22 17:55 ` David Howells
2021-06-22 18:04 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-06-22 18:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-22 18:16 ` Nadav Amit
2021-06-22 18:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-06-22 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-22 18:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-06-22 18:51 ` Nadav Amit
2021-06-22 18:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-22 18:23 ` David Howells
2021-06-22 18:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-22 18:13 ` David Howells
2021-06-22 15:32 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-06-22 15:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-22 15:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-06-22 16:27 ` David Howells
2021-06-22 21:55 ` David Laight
2021-06-22 22:04 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-06-22 22:31 ` David Laight
2021-06-22 22:20 ` Dave Chinner
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='CAHk-=wgM0ZMqY9fuYx0H6UninvbZjMyJeL=7Zz4=AmtO98QncA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.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 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).