From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66DBC7618B for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:53:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31CF2238C for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:53:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388442AbfGWHxR (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jul 2019 03:53:17 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49382 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727170AbfGWHxR (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jul 2019 03:53:17 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F9A983F42; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.72.12.26] (ovpn-12-26.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.26]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E0B60497; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: WARNING in __mmdrop To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: syzbot , aarcange@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, christian@brauner.io, davem@davemloft.net, ebiederm@xmission.com, elena.reshetova@intel.com, guro@fb.com, hch@infradead.org, james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, jglisse@redhat.com, keescook@chromium.org, ldv@altlinux.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, luto@amacapital.net, mhocko@suse.com, mingo@kernel.org, namit@vmware.com, peterz@infradead.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, wad@chromium.org References: <0000000000008dd6bb058e006938@google.com> <000000000000964b0d058e1a0483@google.com> <20190721044615-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20190721081447-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <85dd00e2-37a6-72b7-5d5a-8bf46a3526cf@redhat.com> <20190722040230-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <4bd2ff78-6871-55f2-44dc-0982ffef3337@redhat.com> <20190723010019-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20190723032024-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> From: Jason Wang Message-ID: <1d14de4d-0133-1614-9f64-3ded381de04e@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 15:53:06 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190723032024-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.27]); Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org On 2019/7/23 下午3:23, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> Really let's just use kfree_rcu. It's way cleaner: fire and forget. >> Looks not, you need rate limit the fire as you've figured out? > See the discussion that followed. Basically no, it's good enough > already and is only going to be better. > >> And in fact, >> the synchronization is not even needed, does it help if I leave a comment to >> explain? > Let's try to figure it out in the mail first. I'm pretty sure the > current logic is wrong. Here is what the code what to achieve: - The map was protected by RCU - Writers are: MMU notifier invalidation callbacks, file operations (ioctls etc), meta_prefetch (datapath) - Readers are: memory accessor Writer are synchronized through mmu_lock. RCU is used to synchronized between writers and readers. The synchronize_rcu() in vhost_reset_vq_maps() was used to synchronized it with readers (memory accessors) in the path of file operations. But in this case, vq->mutex was already held, this means it has been serialized with memory accessor. That's why I think it could be removed safely. Anything I miss here? > >>>> Btw, for kvm ioctl it still uses synchronize_rcu() in kvm_vcpu_ioctl(), >>>> (just a little bit more hard to trigger): >>> AFAIK these never run in response to guest events. >>> So they can take very long and guests still won't crash. >> What if guest manages to escape to qemu? >> >> Thanks > Then it's going to be slow. Why do we care? > What we do not want is synchronize_rcu that guest is blocked on. > Ok, this looks like that I have some misunderstanding here of the reason why synchronize_rcu() is not preferable in the path of ioctl. But in kvm case, if rcu_expedited is set, it can triggers IPIs AFAIK. Thanks