[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: process 'stuck' at exit.
On Tue, 2013-12-10 at 14:33 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <> wrote:
> >
> > Shouldn't we do something like the attached?
> So I think that kernel/futex.c part of the patch might be a good idea,
> but on x86-64 (which is what Dave is running), the
> if (end >> __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT)
> test in get_user_pages_fast() should have been equivalent. And even on
> 32-bit, we do check the _PAGE_USER bits in the page tables, so I guess
> it's all good on a get_user_pages_fast() side.
> So never mind. It's not the address checking.
> And I think I see what's up.
> I think what happens is:
> - get_user_pages_fast(address, 1, 1, &page) fails (because it's read-only)
> - get_user_pages_fast(address, 1, 0, &page) succeeds and gets a large-page
> - __get_user_pages_fast(address, 1, 1, &page) fails (because it's read-only).
> so what triggers this is likely that Dave now does large-pages, and
> one of them is a read-only mapping.
> So I would suggest replacing the second "1" in the
> __get_user_pages_fast() call with a "!ro" instead. So how about this
> second patch instead (the access_ok() move remains).
> Comments?

You're too fast for me, but I'm trying to keep up.

It was my understanding that access_ok() was an optimization for private
futexes, but something more heavy weight was required for shared. I
believe that was find_vma() in the past, but Peter Z changed that with
fast gup. Trying to page that all in now and get the exact details....

Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel

 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-11 00:01    [W:0.178 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site