[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2103181828300.3440@eggly.anvils>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 18:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...gle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Allow shmem mappings with MREMAP_DONTUNMAP
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021, Peter Xu wrote:
>
> I'm curious whether it's okay to expand MREMAP_DONTUNMAP to PFNMAP too..
> E.g. vfio maps device MMIO regions with both VM_DONTEXPAND|VM_PFNMAP, to me it
> makes sense to allow the userspace to get such MMIO region remapped/duplicated
> somewhere else as long as the size won't change. With the strict check as
> above we kill all those possibilities.
>
> Though in that case we'll still need commits like cd544fd1dc92 to protect any
> customized ->mremap() when they're not supported.
It would take me many hours to arrive at a conclusion on that:
I'm going to spend the time differently, and let whoever ends up
wanting MREMAP_DONTUNMAP on a VM_PFNMAP area research the safety
of that for existing users.
I did look to see what added VM_PFNMAP to the original VM_DONTEXPAND:
v2.6.15
commit 4d7672b46244abffea1953e55688c0ea143dd617
Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...osdl.org>
Date: Fri Dec 16 10:21:23 2005 -0800
Make sure we copy pages inserted with "vm_insert_page()" on fork
The logic that decides that a fork() might be able to avoid copying a VM
area when it can be re-created by page faults didn't know about the new
vm_insert_page() case.
Also make some things a bit more anal wrt VM_PFNMAP.
Pointed out by Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
So apparently I do bear some anal responsibility. My concern seems
to have been that in those days an unexpected page fault in a special
driver area would end up allocating an anonymous page, which would
never get freed later. Nowadays it looks like there's a SIGBUS for
the equivalent situation.
So probably VM_DONTEXPAND is less important than it was, and the
additional VM_PFNMAP safety net no longer necessary, and you could
strip it out of the old size check and Brian's new dontunmap check.
But I give no guarantee: I don't know VM_PFNMAP users at all well.
Hugh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists