[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <07425013-A7A9-4BB8-8FAA-9581D966A29B@cs.rutgers.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:39:01 -0500
From: "Zi Yan" <zi.yan@...rutgers.edu>
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@...nel.org>,
"Naoya Horiguchi" <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
"Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@...e.cz>,
"Andrea Reale" <ar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Anshuman Khandual" <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm, numa: rework do_pages_move
On 29 Jan 2018, at 17:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:06:14 -0500 "Zi Yan" <zi.yan@...rutgers.edu> wrote:
>
>> I discover that this patch does not hold mmap_sem while migrating pages in
>> do_move_pages_to_node().
>>
>> A simple fix below moves mmap_sem from add_page_for_migration()
>> to the outmost do_pages_move():
>
> I'm not surprised. Why does do_move_pages_to_node() need mmap_sem
> and how is a reader to discover that fact???
do_move_pages_to_node() calls migrate_pages(), which requires down_read(&mmap_sem).
In the outmost do_pages_move(), both add_page_for_migration() and
do_move_pages_to_node() inside it need to hold read lock of mmap_sem.
Do we need to add comments for both functions?
--
Best Regards
Yan Zi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (497 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists