Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755442AbaBRN2d (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:28:33 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42381 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755016AbaBRN2b (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:28:31 -0500 Message-ID: <53035FE2.4080300@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:28:02 -0500 From: Rik van Riel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds , "Kirill A. Shutemov" CC: Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , Dave Hansen , Alexander Viro , Dave Chinner , linux-mm , linux-fsdevel , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCHv2 0/2] mm: map few pages around fault address if they are in page cache References: <1392662333-25470-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/17/2014 02:01 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > - increment the page _mapcount (iow, do "page_add_file_rmap()" > early). This guarantees that any *subsequent* unmap activity on this > page will walk the file mapping lists, and become serialized by the > page table lock we hold. > > - mb_after_atomic_inc() (this is generally free) > > - test that the page is still unlocked and uptodate, and the page > mapping still points to our page. > > - if that is true, we're all good, we can use the page, otherwise we > decrement the mapcount (page_remove_rmap()) and skip the page. > > Hmm? Doing something like this means that we would never lock the > pages we prefault, and you can go back to your gang lookup rather than > that "one page at a time". And the race case is basically never going > to trigger. > > Comments? What would the direct io code do when it runs into a page with elevated mapcount, but for which a mapping cannot be found yet? Looking at the code, it looks like the above scheme could cause some trouble with invalidate_inode_pages2_range(), which has the following sequence: if (page_mapped(page)) { ... unmap page } BUG_ON(page_mapped(page)); In other words, it looks like incrementing _mapcount first could lead to an oops in the truncate and direct IO code. The page lock is used to prevent such races. *sigh* -- All rights reversed -- 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/