archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yang Shi <>
To: David Rientjes <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4 v2] Define killable version for access_remote_vm() and use it in fs/proc
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 16:17:33 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On 2/26/18 5:47 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Yang Shi wrote:
>>> Rather than killable, we have patches that introduce down_read_unfair()
>>> variants for the files you've modified (cmdline and environ) as well as
>>> others (maps, numa_maps, smaps).
>> You mean you have such functionality used by google internally?
> Yup, see
>>> When another thread is holding down_read() and there are queued
>>> down_write()'s, down_read_unfair() allows for grabbing the rwsem without
>>> queueing for it.  Additionally, when another thread is holding
>>> down_write(), down_read_unfair() allows for queueing in front of other
>>> threads trying to grab it for write as well.
>> It sounds the __unfair variant make the caller have chance to jump the gun to
>> grab the semaphore before other waiters, right? But when a process holds the
>> semaphore, i.e. mmap_sem, for a long time, it still has to sleep in
>> uninterruptible state, right?
> Right, it's solving two separate things which I think may be able to be
> merged together.  Killable is solving an issue where the rwsem is blocking
> for a long period of time in uninterruptible sleep, and unfair is solving
> an issue where reading the procfs files gets stalled for a long period of
> time.  We haven't run into an issue (yet) where killable would have solved
> it; we just have the unfair variants to grab the rwsem asap and then, if
> killable, gracefully return.
>>> Ingo would know more about whether a variant like that in upstream Linux
>>> would be acceptable.
>>> Would you be interested in unfair variants instead of only addressing
>>> killable?
>> Yes, I'm although it still looks overkilling to me for reading /proc.
> We make certain inferences on the readablility of procfs files for other
> threads to determine how much its mm's mmap_sem is contended.

I see your points here for reading /proc for system monitor. However, 
I'm concerned that the _unfair APIs get the processes which read /proc 
priority elevation (not real priority change, just look like). It might 
be abused by some applications, for example:

A high priority process and a low priority process are waiting for the 
same rwsem, if the low priority process is trying to read /proc 
maliciously on purpose, it can get elevated to grap the rwsem before any 
other processes which are waiting for the same rwsem.


  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-01  0:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-27  0:25 [RFC PATCH 0/4 v2] Define killable version for access_remote_vm() and use it in fs/proc Yang Shi
2018-02-27  0:25 ` [PATCH 1/4 v2] mm: add access_remote_vm_killable APIs Yang Shi
2018-02-27  0:25 ` [PATCH 2/4 v2] fs: proc: use down_read_killable in proc_pid_cmdline_read() Yang Shi
2018-02-27  0:25 ` [PATCH 3/4 v2] fs: proc: use down_read_killable() in environ_read() Yang Shi
2018-02-27  7:15   ` Alexey Dobriyan
2018-02-27 16:59     ` Yang Shi
2018-02-27  0:25 ` [PATCH 4/4 v2] mm: use access_remote_vm() in get_cmdline() Yang Shi
2018-02-27  1:02 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4 v2] Define killable version for access_remote_vm() and use it in fs/proc David Rientjes
2018-02-27  1:25   ` Yang Shi
2018-02-27  1:47     ` David Rientjes
2018-03-01  0:17       ` Yang Shi [this message]
2018-03-06 18:45 ` Yang Shi
2018-03-06 20:45 ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-06 21:17   ` Yang Shi
2018-03-06 21:41     ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-07  0:47       ` Yang Shi

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* 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).