[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180709171651.GE2662@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 10:16:51 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, john.hubbard@...il.com,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm/fs: put_user_page() proposal
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:08:06PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 09-07-18 18:49:37, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > The problem with blocking in clear_page_dirty_for_io is that the fs is
> > holding the page lock (or locks) and possibly others too. If you
> > expect to have a bunch of long term references hanging around on the
> > page, then there will be hangs and deadlocks everywhere. And if you do
> > not have such log term references, then page lock (or some similar lock
> > bit) for the duration of the DMA should be about enough?
>
> There are two separate questions:
>
> 1) How to identify pages pinned for DMA? We have no bit in struct page to
> use and we cannot reuse page lock as that immediately creates lock
> inversions e.g. in direct IO code (which could be fixed but then good luck
> with auditing all the other GUP users). Matthew had an idea and John
> implemented it based on removing page from LRU and using that space in
> struct page. So we at least have a way to identify pages that are pinned
> and can track their pin count.
>
> 2) What to do when some page is pinned but we need to do e.g.
> clear_page_dirty_for_io(). After some more thinking I agree with you that
> just blocking waiting for page to unpin will create deadlocks like:
Why are we trying to writeback a page that is pinned? It's presumed to
be continuously redirtied by its pinner. We can't evict it.
> ext4_writepages() ext4_direct_IO_write()
> __blockdev_direct_IO()
> iov_iter_get_pages()
> - pins page
> handle = ext4_journal_start_with_reserve(inode, ...)
> - starts transaction
> ...
> lock_page(page)
> mpage_submit_page()
> clear_page_dirty_for_io(page) -> blocks on pin
I don't think it should block. It should fail.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists