Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: proc: smaps_rollup: do not stall write attempts on mmap_lock

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 13/08/2020 03:13, Chinwen Chang wrote:
smaps_rollup will try to grab mmap_lock and go through the whole vma
list until it finishes the iterating. When encountering large processes,
the mmap_lock will be held for a longer time, which may block other
write requests like mmap and munmap from progressing smoothly.

There are upcoming mmap_lock optimizations like range-based locks, but
the lock applied to smaps_rollup would be the coarse type, which doesn't
avoid the occurrence of unpleasant contention.

To solve aforementioned issue, we add a check which detects whether
anyone wants to grab mmap_lock for write attempts.

Change since v1:
- If current VMA is freed after dropping the lock, it will return
- incomplete result. To fix this issue, refine the code flow as
- suggested by Steve. [1]

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/bf40676e-b14b-44cd-75ce-419c70194783@xxxxxxx/

Signed-off-by: Chinwen Chang <chinwen.chang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: Steven Price <steven.price@xxxxxxx>

---
  fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
  1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
index dbda449..23b3a447 100644
--- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
+++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
@@ -853,9 +853,63 @@ static int show_smaps_rollup(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
hold_task_mempolicy(priv); - for (vma = priv->mm->mmap; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
+	for (vma = priv->mm->mmap; vma;) {
  		smap_gather_stats(vma, &mss);
  		last_vma_end = vma->vm_end;
+
+		/*
+		 * Release mmap_lock temporarily if someone wants to
+		 * access it for write request.
+		 */
+		if (mmap_lock_is_contended(mm)) {
+			mmap_read_unlock(mm);
+			ret = mmap_read_lock_killable(mm);
+			if (ret) {
+				release_task_mempolicy(priv);
+				goto out_put_mm;
+			}
+
+			/*
+			 * After dropping the lock, there are three cases to
+			 * consider. See the following example for explanation.
+			 *
+			 *   +------+------+-----------+
+			 *   | VMA1 | VMA2 | VMA3      |
+			 *   +------+------+-----------+
+			 *   |      |      |           |
+			 *  4k     8k     16k         400k
+			 *
+			 * Suppose we drop the lock after reading VMA2 due to
+			 * contention, then we get:
+			 *
+			 *	last_vma_end = 16k
+			 *
+			 * 1) VMA2 is freed, but VMA3 exists:
+			 *
+			 *    find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA3.
+			 *    In this case, just continue from VMA3.
+			 *
+			 * 2) VMA2 still exists:
+			 *
+			 *    find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA2.
+			 *    Iterate the loop like the original one.
+			 *
+			 * 3) No more VMAs can be found:
+			 *
+			 *    find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return NULL.
+			 *    No more things to do, just break.
+			 */
+			vma = find_vma(mm, last_vma_end - 1);
+			/* Case 3 above */
+			if (!vma)
+				break;
+
+			/* Case 1 above */
+			if (vma->vm_start >= last_vma_end)
+				continue;
+		}
+		/* Case 2 above */
+		vma = vma->vm_next;
  	}
show_vma_header_prefix(m, priv->mm->mmap->vm_start,





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux