[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181222221411.ktm5qeebi43lvce5@kshutemo-mobl1>
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2018 01:14:12 +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 Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 02:17:32PM -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> Am I misunderstanding your question/concern?
No. Thanks for the clarification.
>
> I have decided to add the locking (although unnecessary) with something like
> this in hugetlbfs_evict_inode.
>
> /*
> * The vfs layer guarantees that there are no other users of this
> * inode. Therefore, it would be safe to call remove_inode_hugepages
> * without holding i_mmap_rwsem. We acquire and hold here to be
> * consistent with other callers. Since there will be no contention
> * on the semaphore, overhead is negligible.
> */
> i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
> remove_inode_hugepages(inode, 0, LLONG_MAX);
> i_mmap_unlock_write(mapping);
LGTM.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists