linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] mm/rmap: support move to different root anon_vma in folio_move_anon

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]

Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2023 08:19:50 -0700
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
        aarcange@...hat.com, lokeshgidra@...gle.com, hughd@...gle.com,
        mhocko@...e.com, axelrasmussen@...gle.com, rppt@...nel.org,
        willy@...radead.org, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, jannh@...gle.com,
        zhangpeng362@...wei.com, bgeffon@...gle.com,
        kaleshsingh@...gle.com, ngeoffray@...gle.com, jdduke@...gle.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] mm/rmap: support move to different root anon_vma
 in folio_move_anon_rmap()

On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 1:04 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 13.10.23 00:01, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 08, 2023 at 11:42:26PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> >> From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
> >>
> >> For now, folio_move_anon_rmap() was only used to move a folio to a
> >> different anon_vma after fork(), whereby the root anon_vma stayed
> >> unchanged. For that, it was sufficient to hold the folio lock when
> >> calling folio_move_anon_rmap().
> >>
> >> However, we want to make use of folio_move_anon_rmap() to move folios
> >> between VMAs that have a different root anon_vma. As folio_referenced()
> >> performs an RMAP walk without holding the folio lock but only holding the
> >> anon_vma in read mode, holding the folio lock is insufficient.
> >>
> >> When moving to an anon_vma with a different root anon_vma, we'll have to
> >> hold both, the folio lock and the anon_vma lock in write mode.
> >> Consequently, whenever we succeeded in folio_lock_anon_vma_read() to
> >> read-lock the anon_vma, we have to re-check if the mapping was changed
> >> in the meantime. If that was the case, we have to retry.
> >>
> >> Note that folio_move_anon_rmap() must only be called if the anon page is
> >> exclusive to a process, and must not be called on KSM folios.
> >>
> >> This is a preparation for UFFDIO_MOVE, which will hold the folio lock,
> >> the anon_vma lock in write mode, and the mmap_lock in read mode.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> >> ---
> >>   mm/rmap.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> >> index c1f11c9dbe61..f9ddc50269d2 100644
> >> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> >> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> >> @@ -542,7 +542,9 @@ struct anon_vma *folio_lock_anon_vma_read(struct folio *folio,
> >>      struct anon_vma *root_anon_vma;
> >>      unsigned long anon_mapping;
> >>
> >> +retry:
> >>      rcu_read_lock();
> >> +retry_under_rcu:
> >>      anon_mapping = (unsigned long)READ_ONCE(folio->mapping);
> >>      if ((anon_mapping & PAGE_MAPPING_FLAGS) != PAGE_MAPPING_ANON)
> >>              goto out;
> >> @@ -552,6 +554,16 @@ struct anon_vma *folio_lock_anon_vma_read(struct folio *folio,
> >>      anon_vma = (struct anon_vma *) (anon_mapping - PAGE_MAPPING_ANON);
> >>      root_anon_vma = READ_ONCE(anon_vma->root);
> >>      if (down_read_trylock(&root_anon_vma->rwsem)) {
> >> +            /*
> >> +             * folio_move_anon_rmap() might have changed the anon_vma as we
> >> +             * might not hold the folio lock here.
> >> +             */
> >> +            if (unlikely((unsigned long)READ_ONCE(folio->mapping) !=
> >> +                         anon_mapping)) {
> >> +                    up_read(&root_anon_vma->rwsem);
> >> +                    goto retry_under_rcu;
> >
> > Is adding this specific label worthwhile?  How about rcu unlock and goto
> > retry (then it'll also be clear that we won't hold rcu read lock for
> > unpredictable time)?
>
> +1, sounds good to me

Sorry for the delay, I was travelling for a week.

I was hesitant about RCU unlocking and then immediately re-locking but
your point about holding it for unpredictable time makes sense. Will
change. Thanks!

>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> David / dhildenb
>