[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131221135819.GB12407@voom.fritz.box>
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:19 +1100
From: David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>
To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>,
Wanpeng Li <liwanp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/14] mm, hugetlb: protect region tracking via newly
introduced resv_map lock
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 03:53:49PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> There is a race condition if we map a same file on different processes.
> Region tracking is protected by mmap_sem and hugetlb_instantiation_mutex.
> When we do mmap, we don't grab a hugetlb_instantiation_mutex, but,
> grab a mmap_sem. This doesn't prevent other process to modify region
> structure, so it can be modified by two processes concurrently.
>
> To solve this, I introduce a lock to resv_map and make region manipulation
> function grab a lock before they do actual work. This makes region
> tracking safe.
It's not clear to me if you're saying there is a list corruption race
bug in the existing code, or only that there will be if the
instantiation mutex goes away.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists