On Fri 27-07-18 02:10:13, Yang Shi wrote:
> Introduces three new helper functions:
> * munmap_addr_sanity()
> * munmap_lookup_vma()
> * munmap_mlock_vma()
>
> They will be used by do_munmap() and the new do_munmap with zapping
> large mapping early in the later patch.
>
> There is no functional change, just code refactor.
>
> Reviewed-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/mmap.c | 120 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
> index d1eb87e..2504094 100644
> --- a/mm/mmap.c
> +++ b/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -2686,34 +2686,44 @@ int split_vma(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> return __split_vma(mm, vma, addr, new_below);
> }
>
> -/* Munmap is split into 2 main parts -- this part which finds
> - * what needs doing, and the areas themselves, which do the
> - * work. This now handles partial unmappings.
> - * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
> - */
> -int do_munmap(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long start, size_t len,
> - struct list_head *uf)
> +static inline bool munmap_addr_sanity(unsigned long start, size_t len)
munmap_check_addr? Btw. why does this need to have munmap prefix at all?
This is a general address space check.
> {
> - unsigned long end;
> - struct vm_area_struct *vma, *prev, *last;
> -
> if ((offset_in_page(start)) || start > TASK_SIZE || len > TASK_SIZE-start)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return false;
>
> - len = PAGE_ALIGN(len);
> - if (len == 0)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + if (PAGE_ALIGN(len) == 0)
> + return false;
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * munmap_lookup_vma: find the first overlap vma and split overlap vmas.
> + * @mm: mm_struct
> + * @vma: the first overlapping vma
> + * @prev: vma's prev
> + * @start: start address
> + * @end: end address
This really doesn't help me to understand how to use the function.
Why do we need both prev and vma etc...
> + *
> + * returns 1 if successful, 0 or errno otherwise
This is a really weird calling convention. So what does 0 tell? /me
checks the code. Ohh, it is nothing to do. Why cannot you simply return
the vma. NULL implies nothing to do, ERR_PTR on error.
> + */
> +static int munmap_lookup_vma(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct **vma,
> + struct vm_area_struct **prev, unsigned long start,
> + unsigned long end)
> +{
> + struct vm_area_struct *tmp, *last;
>
> /* Find the first overlapping VMA */
> - vma = find_vma(mm, start);
> - if (!vma)
> + tmp = find_vma(mm, start);
> + if (!tmp)
> return 0;
> - prev = vma->vm_prev;
> - /* we have start < vma->vm_end */
> +
> + *prev = tmp->vm_prev;
Why do you set prev here. We might "fail" with 0 right after this
> +
> + /* we have start < vma->vm_end */
>
> /* if it doesn't overlap, we have nothing.. */
> - end = start + len;
> - if (vma->vm_start >= end)
> + if (tmp->vm_start >= end)
> return 0;
>
> /*
> @@ -2723,7 +2733,7 @@ int do_munmap(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long start, size_t len,
> * unmapped vm_area_struct will remain in use: so lower split_vma
> * places tmp vma above, and higher split_vma places tmp vma below.
> */
> - if (start > vma->vm_start) {
> + if (start > tmp->vm_start) {
> int error;
>
> /*
> @@ -2731,13 +2741,14 @@ int do_munmap(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long start, size_t len,
> * not exceed its limit; but let map_count go just above
> * its limit temporarily, to help free resources as expected.
> */
> - if (end < vma->vm_end && mm->map_count >= sysctl_max_map_count)
> + if (end < tmp->vm_end &&
> + mm->map_count > sysctl_max_map_count)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - error = __split_vma(mm, vma, start, 0);
> + error = __split_vma(mm, tmp, start, 0);
> if (error)
> return error;
> - prev = vma;
> + *prev = tmp;
> }
>
> /* Does it split the last one? */
> @@ -2747,7 +2758,48 @@ int do_munmap(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long start, size_t len,
> if (error)
> return error;
> }
> - vma = prev ? prev->vm_next : mm->mmap;
> +
> + *vma = *prev ? (*prev)->vm_next : mm->mmap;
> +
> + return 1;
> +}
the patch would be much more easier to read if you didn't do vma->tmp
renaming.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
