Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1302100

Re: [PATCH] futex: Reduce the scope of lock_page, aka lockless futex_get_key()

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:23:55PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> +++ b/kernel/futex.c
> @@ -520,7 +520,18 @@ again:
>  	else
>  		err = 0;
>  
> -	lock_page(page);
> +	/*
> +	 * The treatment of mapping from this point on is critical. The page
> +	 * lock protects many things but in this context the page lock
> +	 * stabilises mapping, prevents inode freeing in the shared
> +	 * file-backed region case and guards against movement to swap cache.

A little extra whitespace separating this into paragraphs might help
readability.

> +	 * Strictly speaking the page lock is not needed in all cases being
> +	 * considered here and page lock forces unnecessarily serialisation.
> +	 * From this point on, mapping will be reverified if necessary and
> +	 * page lock will be acquired only if it is unavoiable.
> +	 */
> +	mapping = READ_ONCE(compound_head(page)->mapping);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * If page->mapping is NULL, then it cannot be a PageAnon
>  	 * page; but it might be the ZERO_PAGE or in the gate area or

> +	if (unlikely(!mapping)) {
> +		int shmem_swizzled;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Page lock is required to identify which special case above
> +		 * applies. If this is really a shmem page then the page lock
> +		 * will prevent unexpected transitions.
> +		 */
> +		lock_page(page);
> +		shmem_swizzled = PageSwapCache(page);
>  		unlock_page(page);
>  		put_page(page);
> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(mapping);

We've not re-loaded mapping, so how could this possibly be?


> +		/*
> +		 * Take a reference unless it is about to be freed. Previously
> +		 * this reference was taken by ihold under the page lock
> +		 * pinning the inode in place so i_lock was unnecessary. The
> +		 * only way for this check to fail is if the inode was
> +		 * truncated in parallel so warn for now if this happens.
> +		 *
> +		 * TODO: VFS and/or filesystem people should review this check
> +		 * and see if there is a safer or more reliable way to do this.
> +		 */
> +		if (WARN_ON(!atomic_inc_not_zero(&inode->i_count))) {
> +			rcu_read_unlock();
> +			put_page(page);
> +			goto again;
> +		}
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * get_futex_key() must imply MB (B) and we are not going to
> +		 * call into get_futex_key_refs() at this point.
> +		 */
> +		smp_mb__after_atomic();

I don't get this one, the above is a successful atomic op with return
value, that _must_ imply a full barrier.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] futex: Reduce the scope of lock_page, aka lockless futex_get_key() Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-01-05 21:30 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] futex: Reduce the scope of lock_page, aka lockless  futex_get_key() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-05 21:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] futex: Reduce the scope of lock_page, aka lockless  futex_get_key() Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-01-05 21:50 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] futex: Reduce the scope of lock_page, aka lockless  futex_get_key() Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-01-05 22:20 +0100

csiph-web