[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC v3 PATCH 4/5] mm: mmap: zap pages with read mmap_sem for large mapping

On 6/29/18 8:15 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:28:15 -0700 Yang Shi <> wrote:
>>> we're adding a bunch of code to 32-bit kernels which will never be
>>> executed.
>>> I'm thinking it would be better to be much more explicit with "#ifdef
>>> CONFIG_64BIT" in this code, rather than relying upon the above magic.
>>> But I tend to think that the fact that we haven't solved anything on
>>> locked vmas or on uprobed mappings is a shostopper for the whole
>>> approach :(
>> I agree it is not that perfect. But, it still could improve the most use
>> cases.
> Well, those unaddressed usecases will need to be fixed at some point.

Yes, definitely.

> What's our plan for that?

As I mentioned in the earlier email, locked and hugetlb cases might be
able to be solved by separating vm_flags update and actual unmap. I will
look into it further later.

From my point of view, uprobe mapping sounds not that vital.

> Would one of your earlier designs have addressed all usecases? I
> expect the dumb unmap-a-little-bit-at-a-time approach would have?

Yes. The v1 design does unmap with holding write map_sem. So, the
vm_flags update is not a problem.


>> For the locked vmas and hugetlb vmas, unmapping operations need modify
>> vm_flags. But, I'm wondering we might be able to separate unmap and
>> vm_flags update. Because we know they will be unmapped right away, the
>> vm_flags might be able to be updated in write mmap_sem critical section
>> before the actual unmap is called or after it. This is just off the top
>> of my head.
>> For uprobed mappings, I'm not sure how vital it is to this case.
>> Thanks,
>> Yang

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-30 06:27    [W:0.106 / U:4.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site