linux-kernel - [PATCH v4 3/3] mm: proc: smaps_rollup: do not stall write attempts on mmap

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: <1597715898-3854-4-git-send-email-chinwen.chang@mediatek.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Aug 2020 09:58:18 +0800
From:   Chinwen Chang <chinwen.chang@...iatek.com>
To:     Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        "Davidlohr Bueso" <dbueso@...e.de>,
        Chinwen Chang <chinwen.chang@...iatek.com>,
        "Alexey Dobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Jimmy Assarsson <jimmyassarsson@...il.com>,
        Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Daniel Kiss <daniel.kiss@....com>,
        Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <wsd_upstream@...iatek.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 3/3] mm: proc: smaps_rollup: do not stall write attempts on mmap_lock

smaps_rollup will try to grab mmap_lock and go through the whole vma
list until it finishes the iterating. When encountering large processes,
the mmap_lock will be held for a longer time, which may block other
write requests like mmap and munmap from progressing smoothly.

There are upcoming mmap_lock optimizations like range-based locks, but
the lock applied to smaps_rollup would be the coarse type, which doesn't
avoid the occurrence of unpleasant contention.

To solve aforementioned issue, we add a check which detects whether
anyone wants to grab mmap_lock for write attempts.

Change since v1:
- If current VMA is freed after dropping the lock, it will return
- incomplete result. To fix this issue, refine the code flow as
- suggested by Steve. [1]

Change since v2:
- When getting back the mmap lock, the address where you stopped last
- time could now be in the middle of a vma. Add one more check to handle
- this case as suggested by Michel. [2]

Change since v3:
- last_stopped is easily confused with last_vma_end. Replace it with
- a direct call to smap_gather_stats(vma, &mss, last_vma_end) as
- suggested by Steve. [3]

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/bf40676e-b14b-44cd-75ce-419c70194783@arm.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANN689FtCsC71cjAjs0GPspOhgo_HRj+diWsoU1wr98YPktgWg@mail.gmail.com/
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/db0d40e2-72f3-09d5-c162-9c49218f128f@arm.com/

Signed-off-by: Chinwen Chang <chinwen.chang@...iatek.com>
CC: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
CC: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
---
 fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
index 76e623a..1a80624 100644
--- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
+++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
@@ -867,9 +867,73 @@ static int show_smaps_rollup(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 
 	hold_task_mempolicy(priv);
 
-	for (vma = priv->mm->mmap; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
+	for (vma = priv->mm->mmap; vma;) {
 		smap_gather_stats(vma, &mss, 0);
 		last_vma_end = vma->vm_end;
+
+		/*
+		 * Release mmap_lock temporarily if someone wants to
+		 * access it for write request.
+		 */
+		if (mmap_lock_is_contended(mm)) {
+			mmap_read_unlock(mm);
+			ret = mmap_read_lock_killable(mm);
+			if (ret) {
+				release_task_mempolicy(priv);
+				goto out_put_mm;
+			}
+
+			/*
+			 * After dropping the lock, there are four cases to
+			 * consider. See the following example for explanation.
+			 *
+			 *   +------+------+-----------+
+			 *   | VMA1 | VMA2 | VMA3      |
+			 *   +------+------+-----------+
+			 *   |      |      |           |
+			 *  4k     8k     16k         400k
+			 *
+			 * Suppose we drop the lock after reading VMA2 due to
+			 * contention, then we get:
+			 *
+			 *	last_vma_end = 16k
+			 *
+			 * 1) VMA2 is freed, but VMA3 exists:
+			 *
+			 *    find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA3.
+			 *    In this case, just continue from VMA3.
+			 *
+			 * 2) VMA2 still exists:
+			 *
+			 *    find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA2.
+			 *    Iterate the loop like the original one.
+			 *
+			 * 3) No more VMAs can be found:
+			 *
+			 *    find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return NULL.
+			 *    No more things to do, just break.
+			 *
+			 * 4) (last_vma_end - 1) is the middle of a vma (VMA'):
+			 *
+			 *    find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA' whose range
+			 *    contains last_vma_end.
+			 *    Iterate VMA' from last_vma_end.
+			 */
+			vma = find_vma(mm, last_vma_end - 1);
+			/* Case 3 above */
+			if (!vma)
+				break;
+
+			/* Case 1 above */
+			if (vma->vm_start >= last_vma_end)
+				continue;
+
+			/* Case 4 above */
+			if (vma->vm_end > last_vma_end)
+				smap_gather_stats(vma, &mss, last_vma_end);
+		}
+		/* Case 2 above */
+		vma = vma->vm_next;
 	}
 
 	show_vma_header_prefix(m, priv->mm->mmap->vm_start,
-- 
1.9.1