Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758183AbZDOCqS (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:46:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753253AbZDOCqA (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:46:00 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:34833 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752587AbZDOCp7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:45:59 -0400 From: Jeff Moyer To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: LKML , Zach Brown , Jens Axboe , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Nick Piggin , Andrea Arcangeli , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 4/6] aio: Don't inherit aio ring memory at fork References: <20090414151924.C653.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090415091534.AC18.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> X-PGP-KeyID: 1F78E1B4 X-PGP-CertKey: F6FE 280D 8293 F72C 65FD 5A58 1FF8 A7CA 1F78 E1B4 X-PCLoadLetter: What the f**k does that mean? Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:44:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090415091534.AC18.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (KOSAKI Motohiro's message of "Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:56:34 +0900 (JST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3674 Lines: 108 KOSAKI Motohiro writes: > Hi! > >> KOSAKI Motohiro writes: >> >> > AIO folks, Am I missing anything? >> > >> > =============== >> > Subject: [RFC][PATCH] aio: Don't inherit aio ring memory at fork >> > >> > Currently, mm_struct::ioctx_list member isn't copyed at fork. IOW aio context don't inherit at fork. >> > but only ring memory inherited. that's strange. >> > >> > This patch mark DONTFORK to ring-memory too. >> >> Well, given that clearly nobody relies on io contexts being copied to >> the child, I think it's okay to make this change. I think the current >> behaviour violates the principal of least surprise, but I'm having a >> hard time getting upset about that. ;) > > ok. > So, Can I get your Acked-by? I have more comments below. >> > In addition, This patch has good side effect. it also fix >> > "get_user_pages() vs fork" problem. >> >> Hmm, I don't follow you, here. As I understand it, the get_user_pages >> vs. fork problem has to do with the pages used for the actual I/O, not >> the pages used to store the completion data. So, could you elaborate a >> bit on what you mean by the above statement? > > No. > > The problem is, get_user_pages() increment page_count only. > but VM page-fault logic don't care page_count. (it only care page::_mapcount) > Then, fork and pagefault can change virtual-physical relationship although > get_user_pages() is called. > > drawback worst aio scenario here > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > io_setup() and gup inc page_count > > fork inc mapcount > and make write-protect to pte > > write ring from userland(*) page fault and > COW break. > parent process get copyed page and > child get original page owner-ship. > > kmap and memcpy from kernel change child page. (it mean data lost) > > (*) Is this happend? I guess it's possible, but I don't know of any programs that do this. > MADV_DONTFORK or down_read(mmap_sem) or down_read(mm_pinned_sem) > or copy-at-fork mecanism(=Nick/Andrea patch) solve it. OK, thanks for the explanation. + /* + * aio context doesn't inherit while fork. (see mm_init()) + * Then, aio ring also mark DONTFORK. + */ Would you mind if I did some word-smithing on that comment? Something like: /* * The io_context is not inherited by the child after fork() * (see mm_init). Therefore, it makes little sense for the * completion ring to be inherited. */ + ret = sys_madvise(info->mmap_base, info->mmap_size, MADV_DONTFORK); + BUG_ON(ret); + It appears there's no other way to set the VM_DONTCOPY flag, so I guess calling sys_madvise is fine. I'm not sure I agree with the BUG_ON(ret), however, as EAGAIN may be feasible. So, fix that up and you can add my reviewed-by. I think you should push this patch independent of the other patches in this series. >> > I think "man fork" also sould be changed. it only say >> > >> > * The child does not inherit outstanding asynchronous I/O operations from >> > its parent (aio_read(3), aio_write(3)). >> > but aio_context_t (return value of io_setup(2)) also don't inherit in current implementaion. >> >> I can certainly make that change, as I have other changes I need to push >> to Michael, anyway. > > thanks. No problem. As you know, I've already sent a patch for this. Cheers, Jeff -- 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/