[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120515224805.GA25577@quack.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 00:48:05 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: xfs@....sgi.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Hole punching and mmap races
Hello,
Hugh pointed me to ext4 hole punching code which is clearly missing some
locking. But looking at the code more deeply I realized I don't see
anything preventing the following race in XFS or ext4:
TASK1 TASK2
punch_hole(file, 0, 4096)
filemap_write_and_wait()
truncate_pagecache_range()
addr = mmap(file);
addr[0] = 1
^^ writeably fault a page
remove file blocks
FLUSHER
write out file
^^ interesting things can
happen because we expect blocks under the first page to be allocated /
reserved but they are not...
I'm pretty sure ext4 has this problem, I'm not completely sure whether
XFS has something to protect against such race but I don't see anything.
It's not easy to protect against these races. For truncate, i_size protects
us against similar races but for hole punching we don't have any such
mechanism. One way to avoid the race would be to hold mmap_sem while we are
invalidating the page cache and punching hole but that sounds a bit ugly.
Alternatively we could just have some special lock (rwsem?) held during
page_mkwrite() (for reading) and during whole hole punching (for writing)
to serialize these two operations.
Another alternative, which doesn't really look more appealing, is to go
page-by-page and always free corresponding blocks under page lock.
Any other ideas or thoughts?
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists