* Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx> [250205 07:10]:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 4:46 PM Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > + let vma = unsafe { bindings::vma_lookup(self.mm.as_raw(), vma_addr) };
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + if vma.is_null() {
> > > > > > > + None
> > > > > > > + } else {
> > > > > > > + // SAFETY: We just checked that a vma was found, so the pointer is valid. Furthermore,
> > > > > > > + // the returned area will borrow from this read lock guard, so it can only be used
> > > > > > > + // while the mmap read lock is still held.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So We have complicated the locking of the vmas with rcu and per-vma
> > > > > > locking recently. We are now able to look up and use a vma under the
> > > > > > rcu read lock. Does this translate to rust model?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe this is true in recent version of binder as well?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes. The safety requirements of VmAreaRef is that you must hold the
> > > > > mmap read lock *or* the vma read lock while you have a VmAreaRef
> > > > > reference. This particular method achieves that requirement by holding
> > > > > the mmap read lock. But there is also a Rust lock_vma_under_rcu(), see
> > > > > patch 4 for that.
> > > >
> > > > Right, okay. Thanks. You can get the reference by only holding the rcu
> > > > read lock, but you should hold the vma lock to ensure that the vma
> > > > itself (and not just the pointer) is safe to use.
> > >
> > > Hmm... To modify the vma, you must hold the mmap *and* vma write lock,
> > > so holding the mmap read lock prevents mutations?
> >
> > Sorry, I think I confused things with my answer. Your code is fine.
> > The phrasing of the "only be used while the mmap read lock is still
> > held" made me wonder about further clarification on the locking here
> > (because the locking is confusing).
> >
> > Yes, mmap read lock means there are no writers that can modify the vma.
> > Essentially, you are using the lock to ensure the entire vma space isn't
> > changed during your operation - which is heavier than just locking one
> > vma.
>
> I could extend the safety comment like this:
>
> SAFETY: We just checked that a vma was found, so the pointer is valid.
> Furthermore, the returned area will borrow from this read lock guard,
> so it can only be used while the mmap read lock is still held. This
> ensures that there are no writers because writers must hold both the
> mmap and vma write lock.
How about just changing the last part to:
Furthermore, the returned vma is still under the protection of the read
lock guard and can be used while the mmap read lock is still held.
Thanks,
Liam
