lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH mmotm] mempolicy: mbind_range() set_policy() after vma_merge()
Date
* Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> [220304 21:29]:
> On Sat, 5 Mar 2022, Liam Howlett wrote:
> > * Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> [220304 17:48]:
> > > On Fri, 4 Mar 2022, Liam Howlett wrote:
> > > > * Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@Oracle.com> [220304 13:49]:
> > > > > * Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> [220303 23:36]:
> > > >
> > > > I just thought of something after my initial email
> > > >
> > > > How does the ->set_policy() requirement on tmpfs play out for the
> > > > mpol_equal() check earlier in that for loop?
> > >
> > > It took me a while to page all this back in (and remind myself of
> > > what is case 8) to answer that question!
> > >
> > > The answer is that the mpol_equal() check at the top of the loop is on
> > > an existing, unmodified vma; so it's right to assume that any necessary
> > > set_policy() has already been done.
> > >
> > > Whereas the mpol_equal() check being removed in this patch, is being
> > > done on a vma which may have just been extended to cover a greater range:
> > > so although the relevant set_policy() may have already been done on a part
> > > of its range, there is now another part which needs the policy applied.
> >
> > Doesn't the policy get checked during vma_merge()? Specifically the
> > mpol_equal(policy, vma_policy(next)) check?
>
> Sorry, I'm reduced to the unhelpful reply of "Yes. So?"
>
> If vma_merge() finds that vma's new_pol allows it to be merged with prev,
> that still requires mbind_range() (or its call to vma_replace_policy())
> to set_policy() on prev (now assigned to vma), to apply that new_pol to
> the extension of prev - vma_merge() would have checked mpol_equal(),
> but would not have done the set_policy().

I must be missing something. If mpol_equal() isn't sufficient to ensure
we don't need to set_policy(), then why are the other vma_merge() cases
okay - such as madvise_update_vma() and mlock_fixup()? Won't the mem
policy change in the same way in these cases?

Thanks,
Liam

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-03-08 17:07    [W:0.575 / U:0.928 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site