From: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mfo@canonical.com>
To: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: fix race between MADV_FREE reclaim and blkdev direct IO read
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2022 15:58:24 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAO9xwp0z3Gi4NmNsgGfNPQvmp=4e5-NfQ0Wu_m-9XoRR_eegXw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOUHufbrQZQ=ZCmVFRGOFk6+Snuy4Z6YSDUb3qMsHwROXatz_w@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2:57 AM Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 3:17 PM Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
> <mfo@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 6:53 PM Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> wrote:
[...]
> > > Got it. IIRC, get_user_pages() doesn't imply a write barrier. If so,
> > > there should be a smp_wmb() on the other side:
> >
> > If I understand it correctly, it actually implies a full memory
> > barrier, doesn't it?
> >
> > Because... gup_pte_range() (fast path) calls try_grab_compound_head(),
> > which eventually calls* atomic_add_unless(), an atomic conditional RMW
> > operation with return value, thus fully ordered on success (atomic_t.rst);
> > (on failure gup_pte_range() falls back to the slow path, below.)
> >
> > And follow_page_pte() (slow path) calls try_grab_page(), which also calls
> > into try_grab_compound_head(), as the above.
> >
> > (* on CONFIG_TINY_RCU, it calls just atomic_add(), which isn't ordered,
> > but that option is targeted for UP/!SMP, thus not a problem for this race.)
> >
> > Looking at the implementation of arch_atomic_fetch_add_unless() on
> > more relaxed/weakly ordered archs (arm, powerpc, if I got that right),
> > there are barriers like 'smp_mb()' and 'sync' instruction if 'old != unless',
> > so that seems to be OK.
> >
> > And the set_page_dirty() calls occur after get_user_pages() / that point.
> >
> > Does that make sense?
>
> Yes, it does, thanks. I was thinking along the lines of whether there
> is an actual contract. [...]
Ok, got you.
> [...] The reason get_user_pages() currently works as
> a full barrier is not intentional but a side effect of this recent
> cleanup patch:
> commit 54d516b1d6 ("mm/gup: small refactoring: simplify try_grab_page()")
> But I agree your fix works as is.
Thanks for bringing it up!
That commit and its revert [1] (that John mentioned in his reply)
change only try_grab_page() / not try_grab_compound_head(),
thus should affect only the slow path / not the fast path.
So, with either change or revert, the slow path should still be okay,
as it takes the page table lock, and try_to_unmap_one() too, thus
they shouldn't race. And the spinlock barriers get values through.
Thanks,
[1] commit c36c04c2e132 ("Revert "mm/gup: small refactoring: simplify
try_grab_page()"")
--
Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-04 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-31 23:02 [PATCH v3] mm: fix race between MADV_FREE reclaim and blkdev direct IO read Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2022-01-31 23:43 ` Andrew Morton
2022-02-01 2:23 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2022-02-02 14:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-02 16:29 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2022-02-02 19:56 ` Yu Zhao
2022-02-02 21:27 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2022-02-02 21:53 ` Yu Zhao
2022-02-03 22:17 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2022-02-04 5:56 ` Yu Zhao
2022-02-04 7:03 ` John Hubbard
2022-02-04 18:59 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2022-02-04 18:58 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira [this message]
2022-02-16 6:48 ` Huang, Ying
2022-02-16 21:58 ` Yu Zhao
2022-02-16 22:00 ` Yu Zhao
2022-02-17 6:08 ` Huang, Ying
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='CAO9xwp0z3Gi4NmNsgGfNPQvmp=4e5-NfQ0Wu_m-9XoRR_eegXw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=mfo@canonical.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.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).