linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 0/9] Fixes for vhost metadata acceleration

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <74838e61-3a5e-0f51-2092-f4a16d144b45@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Aug 2019 11:26:46 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 0/9] Fixes for vhost metadata acceleration


On 2019/8/13 下午7:57, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 04:31:07PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>> What kind of issues do you see? Spinlock is to synchronize GUP with MMU
>> notifier in this series.
> A GUP that can't sleep can't pagefault which makes it a really weird
> pattern


My understanding is __get_user_pages_fast() assumes caller can fail or 
have fallback. And we have graceful fallback to copy_{to|from}_user().


>
>> Btw, back to the original question. May I know why synchronize_rcu() is not
>> suitable? Consider:
> We already went over this. You'd need to determine it doesn't somehow
> deadlock the mm on reclaim paths. Maybe it is OK, the rcq_gq_wq is
> marked WQ_MEM_RECLAIM at least..


Yes, will take a look at this.


>
> I also think Michael was concerned about the latency spikes a long RCU
> delay would cause.


I don't think it's a real problem consider MMU notifier could be 
preempted or blocked.

Thanks


>
> Jason