[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AA9EAF7.5010401@inria.fr>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:15:19 +0200
From: Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
jsquyres@...co.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
general@...ts.openfabrics.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] please pull ummunotify
Roland Dreier wrote:
> > Can I this version already solved fork() + COW issue? if so, could you
> > please explain what happen at fork. Obviously RDMA point to either parent
> > or child page, not both. but Corrent COW rule is, first touch process
> > get copyed page and other process still own original page. I think it's
> > unpecected behavior form RDMA.
>
> No, ummunotify doesn't really help that much with fork() + COW. If a
> parent forks and then touches pages that are actively in use for RDMA,
> then of course they get COWed and RDMA goes to the wrong memory (from
> the point of view of the parent).
>
My understanding of the code is that fork will end-up calling
copy_page_range() on all VMA, and copy_page_range() calls
mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() if is_cow_mapping() is true,
which should be the case here. So you should get some invalidate events
on fork.
Brice
--
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