The patch titled
Subject: hugetlb: add lockdep check for i_mmap_rwsem held in huge_pmd_share
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
hugetlb-add-lockdep-check-for-i_mmap_rwsem-held-in-huge_pmd_share.patch
This patch should soon appear at
https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/hugetlb-add-lockdep-check-for-i_mmap_rwsem-held-in-huge_pmd_share.patch
and later at
https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/hugetlb-add-lockdep-check-for-i_mmap_rwsem-held-in-huge_pmd_share.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: hugetlb: add lockdep check for i_mmap_rwsem held in huge_pmd_share
As a debugging aid, huge_pmd_share should make sure i_mmap_rwsem is held
if necessary. To clarify the 'if necessary', expand the comment block at
the beginning of huge_pmd_share.
No functional change. The added i_mmap_assert_locked() call is only
enabled if CONFIG_LOCKDEP.
Ideally, this should have been included with commit 34ae204f1851
("hugetlbfs: remove call to huge_pte_alloc without i_mmap_rwsem").
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200911201248.88537-1-mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/hugetlb.c | 15 +++++++++++----
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c~hugetlb-add-lockdep-check-for-i_mmap_rwsem-held-in-huge_pmd_share
+++ a/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -5337,10 +5337,16 @@ void adjust_range_if_pmd_sharing_possibl
* !shared pmd case because we can allocate the pmd later as well, it makes the
* code much cleaner.
*
- * This routine must be called with i_mmap_rwsem held in at least read mode.
- * For hugetlbfs, this prevents removal of any page table entries associated
- * with the address space. This is important as we are setting up sharing
- * based on existing page table entries (mappings).
+ * This routine must be called with i_mmap_rwsem held in at least read mode if
+ * sharing is possible. For hugetlbfs, this prevents removal of any page
+ * table entries associated with the address space. This is important as we
+ * are setting up sharing based on existing page table entries (mappings).
+ *
+ * NOTE: This routine is only called from huge_pte_alloc. Some callers of
+ * huge_pte_alloc know that sharing is not possible and do not take
+ * i_mmap_rwsem as a performance optimization. This is handled by the
+ * if !vma_shareable check at the beginning of the routine. i_mmap_rwsem is
+ * only required for subsequent processing.
*/
pte_t *huge_pmd_share(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, pud_t *pud)
{
@@ -5357,6 +5363,7 @@ pte_t *huge_pmd_share(struct mm_struct *
if (!vma_shareable(vma, addr))
return (pte_t *)pmd_alloc(mm, pud, addr);
+ i_mmap_assert_locked(mapping);
vma_interval_tree_foreach(svma, &mapping->i_mmap, idx, idx) {
if (svma == vma)
continue;
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx are
hugetlb-add-lockdep-check-for-i_mmap_rwsem-held-in-huge_pmd_share.patch
