From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12] Use down_read_unfair() for /sys/<pid>/exe and /sys/<pid>/maps files
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 07:53:31 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100513074949.2136.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1273634462-2672-13-git-send-email-walken@google.com>
> This helps in the following situation:
> - Thread A takes a page fault while reading or writing memory.
> do_page_fault() acquires the mmap_sem for read and blocks on disk
> (either reading the page from file, or hitting swap) for a long time.
> - Thread B does an mmap call and blocks trying to acquire the mmap_sem
> for write
> - Thread C is a monitoring process trying to read every /proc/pid/maps
> in the system. This requires acquiring the mmap_sem for read. Thread C
> blocks behind B, waiting for A to release the rwsem. If thread C
> could be allowed to run in parallel with A, it would probably get done
> long before thread A's disk access completes, thus not actually slowing
> down thread B.
>
> Test results with down_read_unfair_test (10 seconds):
>
> 2.6.33.3:
> threadA completes ~600 faults
> threadB completes ~300 mmap/munmap cycles
> threadC completes ~600 /proc/pid/maps reads
>
> 2.6.33.3 + down_read_unfair:
> threadA completes ~600 faults
> threadB completes ~300 mmap/munmap cycles
> threadC completes ~160000 /proc/pid/maps reads
>
> Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Is it good idea?
So I think /proc shouldn't use unfair thing as backdoor.
It doesn't only makes performance improvement, but also
DoS chance is there.
Please use this feature only in internal.
> ---
> fs/proc/base.c | 2 +-
> fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 2 +-
> fs/proc/task_nommu.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
> index 8418fcc..9132488 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
> @@ -1367,7 +1367,7 @@ struct file *get_mm_exe_file(struct mm_struct *mm)
>
> /* We need mmap_sem to protect against races with removal of
> * VM_EXECUTABLE vmas */
> - down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + down_read_unfair(&mm->mmap_sem);
> exe_file = mm->exe_file;
> if (exe_file)
> get_file(exe_file);
> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> index 0705534..09647ad 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
> mm = mm_for_maps(priv->task);
> if (!mm)
> return NULL;
> - down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + down_read_unfair(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
> tail_vma = get_gate_vma(priv->task);
> priv->tail_vma = tail_vma;
> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> index 46d4b5d..56ca830 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/task_nommu.c
> @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
> priv->task = NULL;
> return NULL;
> }
> - down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + down_read_unfair(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
> /* start from the Nth VMA */
> for (p = rb_first(&mm->mm_rb); p; p = rb_next(p))
> --
> 1.7.0.1
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-12 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-12 3:20 [PATCH 00/12] rwsem changes + down_read_unfair() proposal Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 01/12] rwsem: test for no active locks in __rwsem_do_wake undo code Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 02/12] rwsem: use single atomic update for sem count when waking up readers Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 03/12] rwsem: let RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS represent any number of waiting threads Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 04/12] rwsem: consistently use adjustment variable Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 05/12] x86 rwsem: take advantage of new RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS semantics Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 06/12] rwsem: wake queued readers when other readers are active Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 07/12] rwsem: wake queued readers when writer blocks on active read lock Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 08/12] rwsem: smaller wrappers around rwsem_down_failed_common Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:20 ` [PATCH 09/12] generic rwsem: implement down_read_unfair Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:21 ` [PATCH 10/12] rwsem: down_read_unfair infrastructure support Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:21 ` [PATCH 11/12] x86 rwsem: down_read_unfair implementation Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 3:21 ` [PATCH 12/12] Use down_read_unfair() for /sys/<pid>/exe and /sys/<pid>/maps files Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 22:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2010-05-12 23:35 ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-13 0:32 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-05-12 10:39 ` [PATCH 01/12] rwsem: test for no active locks in __rwsem_do_wake undo code David Howells
2010-05-12 11:01 ` [PATCH 02/12] rwsem: use single atomic update for sem count when waking up readers David Howells
2010-05-13 0:54 ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 11:36 ` David Howells
2010-05-12 11:45 ` [PATCH 04/12] rwsem: consistently use adjustment variable David Howells
2010-05-13 1:12 ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:10 ` [PATCH 05/12] x86 rwsem: take advantage of new RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS semantics David Howells
2010-05-12 12:22 ` [PATCH 06/12] rwsem: wake queued readers when other readers are active David Howells
2010-05-13 2:39 ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-13 5:41 ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:33 ` [PATCH 07/12] rwsem: wake queued readers when writer blocks on active read lock David Howells
2010-05-12 12:36 ` [PATCH 08/12] rwsem: smaller wrappers around rwsem_down_failed_common David Howells
2010-05-12 12:42 ` David Howells
2010-05-13 2:54 ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-05-12 12:46 ` [PATCH 09/12] generic rwsem: implement down_read_unfair David Howells
2010-05-12 13:08 ` [PATCH 11/12] x86 rwsem: down_read_unfair implementation David Howells
2010-05-12 13:10 ` [PATCH 12/12] Use down_read_unfair() for /sys/<pid>/exe and /sys/<pid>/maps files David Howells
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100513074949.2136.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikew@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--cc=yinghan@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®