Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@oracle.com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
CC:     Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org" <nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        "bskeggs@redhat.com" <bskeggs@redhat.com>,
        "rcampbell@nvidia.com" <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
        "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "jhubbard@nvidia.com" <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        "bsingharora@gmail.com" <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
        "jglisse@redhat.com" <jglisse@redhat.com>,
        "willy@infradead.org" <willy@infradead.org>,
        "jgg@nvidia.com" <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        "peterx@redhat.com" <peterx@redhat.com>,
        "hughd@google.com" <hughd@google.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 03/10] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v9 03/10] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap
Thread-Index: AQHXUKDDOO6CIzaEtEqx7vu0BJsuU6r0iUyAgABVhwCAD4YrAA==
Date:   Fri, 4 Jun 2021 20:49:39 +0000
Message-ID: <20210604204934.sbspsmwdqdtmz73d@revolver>
References: <20210524132725.12697-1-apopple@nvidia.com>
 <20210524132725.12697-4-apopple@nvidia.com>
 <20210525183710.fa2m2sbfixnhz7g5@revolver>
 <CALvZod5T1yjOk48Q_efppvP6iQWnSUwdOQL=G9TadrB6nS-s4Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALvZod5T1yjOk48Q_efppvP6iQWnSUwdOQL=G9TadrB6nS-s4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <6DA3C140440C7F4BAF074C493F0B2227@namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 038393b0-3a47-467e-7e87-08d9279a45e3
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Jun 2021 20:49:39.9131
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4e2c6054-71cb-48f1-bd6c-3a9705aca71b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: aqt9UI5fi2NOxc0YMg5tsWWZ3j2jPOhzSeJacCnL9OJUbra4zH2fNwXCRfTirmYvJGerIBst22mts1QhjsSinA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DS7PR10MB4975
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=10005 signatures=668682
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0
 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0
 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1
 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2106040143
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 0A5rMvumqGklVNjCrlAZYjEv0rUi8hvK
X-Proofpoint-GUID: 0A5rMvumqGklVNjCrlAZYjEv0rUi8hvK
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

* Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> [210525 19:45]:
> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 11:40 AM Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@oracle.com> w=
rote:
> >
> [...]
> > >
> > > +/*
> > > + * Walks the vma's mapping a page and mlocks the page if any locked =
vma's are
> > > + * found. Once one is found the page is locked and the scan can be t=
erminated.
> > > + */
> >
> > Can you please add that this requires the mmap_sem() lock to the
> > comments?
> >
>=20
> Why does this require mmap_sem() lock? Also mmap_sem() lock of which mm_s=
truct?


Doesn't the mlock_vma_page() require the mmap_sem() for reading?  The
mm_struct in vma->vm_mm;


From what I can see, at least the following paths have mmap_lock held
for writing:

munlock_vma_pages_range() from __do_munmap()
munlokc_vma_pages_range() from remap_file_pages()

>=20
> > > +static bool page_mlock_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct =
*vma,
> > > +                              unsigned long address, void *unused)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct page_vma_mapped_walk pvmw =3D {
> > > +             .page =3D page,
> > > +             .vma =3D vma,
> > > +             .address =3D address,
> > > +     };
> > > +
> > > +     /* An un-locked vma doesn't have any pages to lock, continue th=
e scan */
> > > +     if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED))
> > > +             return true;
> > > +
> > > +     while (page_vma_mapped_walk(&pvmw)) {
> > > +             /* PTE-mapped THP are never mlocked */
> > > +             if (!PageTransCompound(page))
> > > +                     mlock_vma_page(page);
> > > +             page_vma_mapped_walk_done(&pvmw);
> > > +
> > > +             /*
> > > +              * no need to continue scanning other vma's if the page=
 has
> > > +              * been locked.
> > > +              */
> > > +             return false;
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > > +     return true;
> > > +}

munlock_vma_pages_range() comments still references try_to_{munlock|unmap}