LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] mm: mmap: unmap large mapping by section
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:28:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e36daca9-8bf0-5fad-d68b-a3116cc1a75e@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180322161316.GD28468@bombadil.infradead.org>

On 22/03/2018 17:13, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 09:06:14AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
>> On 3/22/18 2:10 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Wed 21-03-18 15:36:12, Yang Shi wrote:
>>>> On 3/21/18 2:23 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>> On Wed 21-03-18 10:16:41, Yang Shi wrote:
>>>>>> proc_pid_cmdline_read(), it calls access_remote_vm() which need acquire
>>>>>> mmap_sem too, so the mmap_sem scalability issue will be hit sooner or later.
>>>>> Ohh, absolutely. mmap_sem is unfortunatelly abused and it would be great
>>>>> to remove that. munmap should perform much better. How to do that safely
>>> The full vma will have to be range locked. So there is nothing small or large.
>>
>> It sounds not helpful to a single large vma case since just one range lock
>> for the vma, it sounds equal to mmap_sem.
> 
> But splitting mmap_sem into pieces is beneficial for this case.  Imagine
> we have a spinlock / rwlock to protect the rbtree 

Which is more or less what I'm proposing in the speculative page fault series:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/13/1158

This being said, having a per VMA lock could lead to tricky dead lock case,
when merging multiple VMA happens in parallel since multiple VMA will have to
be locked at the same time, grabbing those lock in a fine order will be required.

> ... / arg_start / arg_end
> / ...  and then each VMA has a rwsem (or equivalent).  access_remote_vm()
> would walk the tree and grab the VMA's rwsem for read while reading
> out the arguments.  The munmap code would have a completely different
> VMA write-locked.
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-22 16:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-20 21:31 [RFC PATCH 0/8] Drop mmap_sem during unmapping large map Yang Shi
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 1/8] mm: mmap: unmap large mapping by section Yang Shi
2018-03-21 13:08   ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-21 16:31     ` Yang Shi
2018-03-21 17:29       ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-21 21:45         ` Yang Shi
2018-03-21 22:15           ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-21 22:40             ` Yang Shi
2018-03-21 22:46           ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-22 15:32             ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-22 15:40               ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-22 15:54                 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-22 16:05                   ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-22 16:18                     ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-22 16:46                       ` Yang Shi
2018-03-23 13:03                         ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-22 16:51                       ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-22 16:49                     ` Yang Shi
2018-03-22 17:34         ` Yang Shi
2018-03-22 18:48           ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-24 18:24         ` Jerome Glisse
2018-03-21 13:14   ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-21 16:50     ` Yang Shi
2018-03-21 17:16       ` Yang Shi
2018-03-21 21:23         ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-21 22:36           ` Yang Shi
2018-03-22  9:10             ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-22 16:06               ` Yang Shi
2018-03-22 16:12                 ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-22 16:13                 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-22 16:28                   ` Laurent Dufour [this message]
2018-03-22 16:36                     ` David Laight
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 2/8] mm: mmap: pass atomic parameter to do_munmap() call sites Yang Shi
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 3/8] mm: mremap: pass atomic parameter to do_munmap() Yang Shi
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 4/8] mm: nommu: add " Yang Shi
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 5/8] ipc: shm: pass " Yang Shi
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 6/8] fs: proc/vmcore: " Yang Shi
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 7/8] x86: mpx: " Yang Shi
2018-03-20 22:35   ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-03-21 16:53     ` Yang Shi
2018-03-20 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH 8/8] x86: vma: " Yang Shi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=e36daca9-8bf0-5fad-d68b-a3116cc1a75e@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] mm: mmap: unmap large mapping by section' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).