On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 08:26:52PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> All this got me wondering if we really need to take i_mmap_rwsem in write
> mode here. We are not changing the tree, only traversing it looking for
> a suitable vma.
>
> Unless I am missing something, the hugetlb code only ever takes the semaphore
> in write mode; never read. Could this have been the result of changing the
> tree semaphore to read/write? Instead of analyzing all the code, the easiest
> and safest thing would have been to take all accesses in write mode.
I was wondering the same thing. It was changed here:
commit 83cde9e8ba95d180eaefefe834958fbf7008cf39
Author: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri Dec 12 16:54:21 2014 -0800
mm: use new helper functions around the i_mmap_mutex
Convert all open coded mutex_lock/unlock calls to the
i_mmap_[lock/unlock]_write() helpers.
and a subsequent patch said:
This conversion is straightforward. For now, all users take the write
lock.
There were subsequent patches which changed a few places
c8475d144abb1e62958cc5ec281d2a9e161c1946
1acf2e040721564d579297646862b8ea3dd4511b
d28eb9c861f41aa2af4cfcc5eeeddff42b13d31e
874bfcaf79e39135cd31e1cfc9265cf5222d1ec3
3dec0ba0be6a532cac949e02b853021bf6d57dad
but I don't know why this one wasn't changed.
(I was also wondering about caching a potentially sharable page table
in the address_space to avoid having to walk the VMA tree at all if that
one happened to be sharable).
