lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090204183600.f41e8b7e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:36:00 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	"Swamy Gowda" <swamy@...ident.com>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
	Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr
Subject: Re: Need to take mmap_sem lock in move_pages.

On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 01:02:35 -0800
"Swamy Gowda" <swamy@...ident.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> I believe that migrate_pages related race conditions were fixed as part
> of rcu_read_lock in unmap_and_move. But it seems we are still taking the
> mmap_sem lock in do_move_pages function, is this really required? If it
> is so why it is not needed in hot remove path? 
> 

Hmm , CC: to Christoph and Brice.

My understanding is following.

 1. do_move_page_to_node_array() at el. needs mmap_sem (read-side) because it
    scans page table and vma. While we have to scan vmas to find pages for
    migration, it needs mmap_sem.

    So, this part,
    == do_move_page_to_node_array()
 903         err = 0;
 904         if (!list_empty(&pagelist))
 905                 err = migrate_pages(&pagelist, new_page_node,
 906                                 (unsigned long)pm);
 907 
 908         up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
   ==
   can be
   ==
 903         err = 0;
 904         up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
 905         if (!list_empty(&pagelist))
 906                 err = migrate_pages(&pagelist, new_page_node,
 907                                 (unsigned long)pm);
 908 
    ==
   ?

   But, by above move of semaphore, reliability of  sys_migrate_page() goes down.
   Assume 2 threads. Thread1 calls sys_move_pages(), thread2 does page fault,
   touches pte under migraton.
   ==
       Thread 1                    Thread2                 

       up_read(&mm->mmap_sem)
                                    page fault => map new page.
       end of migration.
    ==

    What a user expects is move all pages within [start, end) moves to nodes specified.
    And, if the page doesn't exist, "err = -ENOENT" is set to status buffer.

    But, in above case, the page exists but not in place the user expected.
    So, there are trade offs.

    Pros.
     up_read(&mmap_sem) before migration will reduce period of lock.
    Cons.
     sys_migrate_pages() at el. are not atomic anymore and return code is not
     reliable.

 2. memory hotplug's migrate_page() finds the page by physical memory's memmap.
    NO scans to any mm_struct or vmas. So, not necessary to take mmap_sem.
    (The logic is same as to vmscan.c's logic)
    It also moves pages which is not mapped.

Thanks,
-Kame


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ