[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181221102824.5v36l6l5t2zthpgr@kshutemo-mobl1>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 13:28:24 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Prakash Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] hugetlbfs: Use i_mmap_rwsem to fix page
fault/truncate race
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 02:35:57PM -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> Instead of writing the required complicated code for this rare
> occurrence, just eliminate the race. i_mmap_rwsem is now held in read
> mode for the duration of page fault processing. Hold i_mmap_rwsem
> longer in truncation and hold punch code to cover the call to
> remove_inode_hugepages.
One of remove_inode_hugepages() callers is noticeably missing --
hugetlbfs_evict_inode(). Why?
It at least deserves a comment on why the lock rule doesn't apply to it.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists