On Tue 28-04-15 11:38:35, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I am still not sure I see the problem here. > > Basically, I absolutely hate the notion of us doing something > unsynchronized, when I can see us undoing a mmap that another thread > is doing. It's wrong. OK, I have checked the mmap(2) man page and there is no single mention about multi-threaded usage. So even though I personally think that user fault handlers which do mmap(MAP_FIXED) without synchronization to parallel mmaps are broken by definition we cannot simply rule them out and it is not the kernel job to make them broken even more or in a subtly different way. So here is an RFC for the man page patch. I am not very good in the format but man doesn't complain about any formating issues. --- >From 903ed733187afaa4d27fef3c24f413304494411c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 11:02:19 +0200 Subject: [RFC PATCH] mmap.2: clarify MAP_LOCKED semantic MAP_LOCKED had a subtly different semantic from mmap(2)+mlock(2) since it has been introduced. mlock(2) fails if the memory range cannot get populated to guarantee that no future major faults will happen on the range. mmap(MAP_LOCKED) on the other hand silently succeeds even if the range was populated only partially. Fixing this subtle difference in the kernel is rather awkward because the memory population happens after mm locks have been dropped and so the cleanup before returning failure (munlock) could operate on something else than the originally mapped area. E.g. speculative userspace page fault handler catching SEGV and doing mmap(fault_addr, MAP_FIXED|MAP_LOCKED) might discard portion of a racing mmap and lead to lost data. Although it is not clear whether such a usage would be valid, mmap page doesn't explicitly describe requirements for threaded applications so we cannot exclude this possibility. This patch makes the semantic of MAP_LOCKED explicit and suggest using mmap + mlock as the only way to guarantee no later major page faults. Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> --- man2/mmap.2 | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/man2/mmap.2 b/man2/mmap.2 index 54d68cf87e9e..1486be2e96b3 100644 --- a/man2/mmap.2 +++ b/man2/mmap.2 @@ -235,8 +235,19 @@ See the Linux kernel source file for further information. .TP .BR MAP_LOCKED " (since Linux 2.5.37)" -Lock the pages of the mapped region into memory in the manner of +Mark the mmaped region to be locked in the same way as .BR mlock (2). +This implementation will try to populate (prefault) the whole range but +the mmap call doesn't fail with +.B ENOMEM +if this fails. Therefore major faults might happen later on. So the semantic +is not as strong as +.BR mlock (2). +.BR mmap (2) ++ +.BR mlock (2) +should be used when major faults are not acceptable after the initialization +of the mapping. This flag is ignored in older kernels. .\" If set, the mapped pages will not be swapped out. .TP -- 2.1.4 -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>