linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 11/16] mm: replace vm_lock and detached flag with a reference count

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: <bf7fd920-4c51-44f3-bf3e-8cfe2bb5f8a6@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 23:26:21 +0100
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org, willy@...radead.org,
 liam.howlett@...cle.com, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
 hannes@...xchg.org, mjguzik@...il.com, oliver.sang@...el.com,
 mgorman@...hsingularity.net, david@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com,
 oleg@...hat.com, dave@...olabs.net, paulmck@...nel.org, brauner@...nel.org,
 dhowells@...hat.com, hdanton@...a.com, hughd@...gle.com,
 lokeshgidra@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com, jannh@...gle.com,
 shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, souravpanda@...gle.com, pasha.tatashin@...een.com,
 klarasmodin@...il.com, richard.weiyang@...il.com, corbet@....net,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 11/16] mm: replace vm_lock and detached flag with a
 reference count

On 1/10/25 16:56, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> > --- a/mm/memory.c
>> > +++ b/mm/memory.c
>> > @@ -6370,9 +6370,41 @@ struct vm_area_struct *lock_mm_and_find_vma(struct mm_struct *mm,
>> >  #endif
>> >
>> >  #ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
>> > +static inline bool __vma_enter_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned int tgt_refcnt)
>> > +{
>> > +     /*
>> > +      * If vma is detached then only vma_mark_attached() can raise the
>> > +      * vm_refcnt. mmap_write_lock prevents racing with vma_mark_attached().
>> > +      */
>> > +     if (!refcount_add_not_zero(VMA_LOCK_OFFSET, &vma->vm_refcnt))
>> > +             return false;
>> > +
>> > +     rwsem_acquire(&vma->vmlock_dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
>> > +     rcuwait_wait_event(&vma->vm_mm->vma_writer_wait,
>> > +                refcount_read(&vma->vm_refcnt) == tgt_refcnt,
>> > +                TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
>> > +     lock_acquired(&vma->vmlock_dep_map, _RET_IP_);
>> > +
>> > +     return true;
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > +static inline void __vma_exit_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, bool *detached)
>> > +{
>> > +     *detached = refcount_sub_and_test(VMA_LOCK_OFFSET, &vma->vm_refcnt);
>> > +     rwsem_release(&vma->vmlock_dep_map, _RET_IP_);
>> > +}
>> > +
>> >  void __vma_start_write(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned int mm_lock_seq)
>> >  {
>> > -     down_write(&vma->vm_lock.lock);
>> > +     bool locked;
>> > +
>> > +     /*
>> > +      * __vma_enter_locked() returns false immediately if the vma is not
>> > +      * attached, otherwise it waits until refcnt is (VMA_LOCK_OFFSET + 1)
>> > +      * indicating that vma is attached with no readers.
>> > +      */
>> > +     locked = __vma_enter_locked(vma, VMA_LOCK_OFFSET + 1);
>>
>> Wonder if it would be slightly better if tgt_refcount was just 1 (or 0
>> below in vma_mark_detached()) and the VMA_LOCK_OFFSET added to it in
>> __vma_enter_locked() itself as it's the one adding it in the first place.
> 
> Well, it won't be called tgt_refcount then. Maybe "bool vma_attached"
> and inside __vma_enter_locked() we do:
> 
> unsigned int tgt_refcnt = VMA_LOCK_OFFSET + vma_attached ? 1 : 0;
> 
> Is that better?

Yeah I think so as it centralizes the target refcount logic into a single
place __vma_enter_locked().
Hm but then it's weird that __vma_start_write() would set vma_attached to
true and yet it handles also a case where it's not attached.
Maybe call the parameter "detaching" and switch the 0 and 1?