linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mm: use per_vma lock for MADV

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: <b0a9f57a-9f15-4907-b2f2-24720095e5da@lucifer.local>
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2025 08:24:16 +0100
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
To: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>,
        "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com>,
        Tangquan Zheng <zhengtangquan@...o.com>,
        Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: use per_vma lock for MADV_DONTNEED

On Sat, Jun 07, 2025 at 04:53:02PM +1200, Barry Song wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 4:05 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2025 at 12:46:23PM +1200, Barry Song wrote:
> > > To simplify handling, the implementation falls back to the standard
> > > mmap_lock if userfaultfd is enabled on the VMA, avoiding the complexity of
> > > userfaultfd_remove().
> >
> > This feels too complex to me.  Why do we defer grabbing the vma lock
> > so late, instead of grabbing it at the start like the fault handler does?
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
> It looks like you missed the spot where your comment should have gone:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/0b96ce61-a52c-4036-b5b6-5c50783db51f@lucifer.local/
> So I believe Lorenzo is the best person to respond to your concern.
>
> In both v1 and v2 [1][2], we did try to fall back as early as possible:
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250527044145.13153-1-21cnbao@gmail.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250530104439.64841-1-21cnbao@gmail.com/
>
> But that approach had its own problems:
> * It's not extensible to other madvise operations.
> * It's not easy to adapt to vector_madvise.
>
> I also initially found the new approach too complex and tried a few
> alternatives, but each had its own problems. In the end, Lorenzo's
> solution still seems to be the cleanest among them.
>
> I even forgot to move the code below back to visit() from
> madvise_vma_behavior(). I had changed it while exploring an
> alternative and should have reverted it.
>
> +       if (madv_behavior && madv_behavior->lock_mode ==
> MADVISE_VMA_READ_LOCK) {
> +               vma = try_vma_read_lock(mm, madv_behavior, start, end);
> +               if (vma) {
> +                       error = madvise_vma_behavior(vma, &prev, start, end,
> +                               madv_behavior);  /* better to be visit() */
> +                       vma_end_read(vma);
> +                       return error;
> +               }
> +       }

Ah damn missed that :) and I just tagged haha, yeah that should be visit().

I hate this pattern, maybe will refactor in future... entirely for this rather
hacked in anon_vma_name implementation :(

>
> Thanks
> Barry