| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:40:59 -0800
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, <john.hubbard@...il.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Benvenuti <benve@...co.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...el.com>,
Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder versions
On 12/3/18 11:53 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Thanks for having documentation as a part of the patch. Some kernel-doc
> nits below.
>
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 04:17:19PM -0800, john.hubbard@...il.com wrote:
>> From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
>>
>> Introduces put_user_page(), which simply calls put_page().
>> This provides a way to update all get_user_pages*() callers,
>> so that they call put_user_page(), instead of put_page().
>>
>> Also introduces put_user_pages(), and a few dirty/locked variations,
>> as a replacement for release_pages(), and also as a replacement
>> for open-coded loops that release multiple pages.
>> These may be used for subsequent performance improvements,
>> via batching of pages to be released.
>>
>> This is the first step of fixing the problem described in [1]. The steps
>> are:
>>
>> 1) (This patch): provide put_user_page*() routines, intended to be used
>> for releasing pages that were pinned via get_user_pages*().
>>
>> 2) Convert all of the call sites for get_user_pages*(), to
>> invoke put_user_page*(), instead of put_page(). This involves dozens of
>> call sites, and will take some time.
>>
>> 3) After (2) is complete, use get_user_pages*() and put_user_page*() to
>> implement tracking of these pages. This tracking will be separate from
>> the existing struct page refcounting.
>>
>> 4) Use the tracking and identification of these pages, to implement
>> special handling (especially in writeback paths) when the pages are
>> backed by a filesystem. Again, [1] provides details as to why that is
>> desirable.
>>
>> [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/753027/ : "The Trouble with get_user_pages()"
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
>>
>> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
>> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
>> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
>> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
>> Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
>> Cc: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
>> Cc: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/mm.h | 20 ++++++++++++
>> mm/swap.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 100 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
>> index 5411de93a363..09fbb2c81aba 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
>> @@ -963,6 +963,26 @@ static inline void put_page(struct page *page)
>> __put_page(page);
>> }
>>
>> +/*
>> + * put_user_page() - release a page that had previously been acquired via
>> + * a call to one of the get_user_pages*() functions.
>
> Please add @page parameter description, otherwise kernel-doc is unhappy
Hi Mike,
Sorry I missed these kerneldoc points from your earlier review! I'll fix it
up now and it will show up in the next posting.
>
>> + *
>> + * Pages that were pinned via get_user_pages*() must be released via
>> + * either put_user_page(), or one of the put_user_pages*() routines
>> + * below. This is so that eventually, pages that are pinned via
>> + * get_user_pages*() can be separately tracked and uniquely handled. In
>> + * particular, interactions with RDMA and filesystems need special
>> + * handling.
>> + */
>> +static inline void put_user_page(struct page *page)
>> +{
>> + put_page(page);
>> +}
>> +
>> +void put_user_pages_dirty(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages);
>> +void put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages);
>> +void put_user_pages(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages);
>> +
>> #if defined(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM) && !defined(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP)
>> #define SECTION_IN_PAGE_FLAGS
>> #endif
>> diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
>> index aa483719922e..bb8c32595e5f 100644
>> --- a/mm/swap.c
>> +++ b/mm/swap.c
>> @@ -133,6 +133,86 @@ void put_pages_list(struct list_head *pages)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_pages_list);
>>
>> +typedef int (*set_dirty_func)(struct page *page);
>> +
>> +static void __put_user_pages_dirty(struct page **pages,
>> + unsigned long npages,
>> + set_dirty_func sdf)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long index;
>> +
>> + for (index = 0; index < npages; index++) {
>> + struct page *page = compound_head(pages[index]);
>> +
>> + if (!PageDirty(page))
>> + sdf(page);
>> +
>> + put_user_page(page);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * put_user_pages_dirty() - for each page in the @pages array, make
>> + * that page (or its head page, if a compound page) dirty, if it was
>> + * previously listed as clean. Then, release the page using
>> + * put_user_page().
>> + *
>> + * Please see the put_user_page() documentation for details.
>> + *
>> + * set_page_dirty(), which does not lock the page, is used here.
>> + * Therefore, it is the caller's responsibility to ensure that this is
>> + * safe. If not, then put_user_pages_dirty_lock() should be called instead.
>> + *
>> + * @pages: array of pages to be marked dirty and released.
>> + * @npages: number of pages in the @pages array.
>
> Please put the parameters description next to the brief function
> description, as described in [1]
>
> [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/doc-guide/kernel-doc.html#function-documentation
>
OK.
>
>> + *
>> + */
>> +void put_user_pages_dirty(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages)
>> +{
>> + __put_user_pages_dirty(pages, npages, set_page_dirty);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_user_pages_dirty);
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * put_user_pages_dirty_lock() - for each page in the @pages array, make
>> + * that page (or its head page, if a compound page) dirty, if it was
>> + * previously listed as clean. Then, release the page using
>> + * put_user_page().
>> + *
>> + * Please see the put_user_page() documentation for details.
>> + *
>> + * This is just like put_user_pages_dirty(), except that it invokes
>> + * set_page_dirty_lock(), instead of set_page_dirty().
>> + *
>> + * @pages: array of pages to be marked dirty and released.
>> + * @npages: number of pages in the @pages array.
>
> Ditto
OK.
>
>> + *
>> + */
>> +void put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages)
>> +{
>> + __put_user_pages_dirty(pages, npages, set_page_dirty_lock);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_user_pages_dirty_lock);
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * put_user_pages() - for each page in the @pages array, release the page
>> + * using put_user_page().
>> + *
>> + * Please see the put_user_page() documentation for details.
>> + *
>> + * @pages: array of pages to be marked dirty and released.
>> + * @npages: number of pages in the @pages array.
>> + *
>
> And here as well :)
OK.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
Powered by blists - more mailing lists