From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>,
Maksim Yevmenkin <maksim.yevmenkin@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
will@crowder-design.com, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Mikos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix OOPS in mmap_region() when merging adjacent VM_LOCKED file segments
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:27:23 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901301426390.3150@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1233351412.908.69.camel@lts-notebook>
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
>
> I just verified that adding VM_ACCOUNT to VM_MERGEABLE does allow the
> merge to happen with the test program. And the system didn't come
> crashing down around me. But, I wouldn't trust that simple test as the
> last word. A short run of a stress load I use held up/still running,
> but I can't tell whether it's merging as expected there.
Just ignoring VM_ACCOUNT for merging is not the right thing to do. It
probably works in practice for just about everything, but at least in
theory it does mean that mmap() can stop honoring MAP_NORESERVE.
Admittedly the circumstances where that happens are unlikely, and nobody
probably even really uses MAP_NORESERVE in the first place, so I doubt you
can ever see it as a real issue, but it's still technically wrong to merge
vma's that can differ in VM_ACCOUNT.
Now, the particular test you have, VM_ACCOUNT differs only during that
temporary window, and the vma's really do end up with the same VM_ACCOUNT
state in the end, so merging them is correct, but if you were to privately
map the same file (or private anonymous map) with the same permissions
next to each other so that they -could- merge, but use MAP_NORESERVE on
one and not on the other, then they shouldn't merge.
So VM_ACCOUNT does matter - just barely - for merging, and we just happen
to currently hit it too much due to a very odd internal reason.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-30 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <bb4a86c70901281151w4300605r3882461cd6e9774a@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901281316450.3123@localhost.localdomain>
2009-01-29 20:03 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-01-29 20:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 20:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 22:32 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-01-29 23:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 4:43 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-01-30 4:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-29 22:47 ` Maksim Yevmenkin
2009-01-29 22:48 ` Randy Dunlap
2009-01-29 23:31 ` Maksim Yevmenkin
2009-01-30 2:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 5:56 ` Greg KH
2009-01-30 16:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 17:40 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-01-30 18:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 18:30 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-01-30 19:53 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-01-30 20:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 21:12 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-01-30 21:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 21:36 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-01-30 22:27 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-01-31 12:35 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-01-31 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-02-02 11:59 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-02-02 12:54 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-02-02 14:10 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-02-02 18:58 ` Mel Gorman
2009-02-02 19:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-02-02 21:50 ` Mel Gorman
2009-02-02 22:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-02-02 22:35 ` Mel Gorman
2009-02-02 18:33 ` Mel Gorman
2009-02-03 16:13 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-02-03 16:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-02-03 17:10 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-02-03 21:50 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-01-30 21:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-31 12:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-01-30 20:33 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-01-30 20:53 ` Randy Dunlap
2009-01-30 20:59 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-01-30 21:11 ` Will Crowder
2009-01-30 23:44 ` Greg KH
2009-01-30 8:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 16:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-30 16:49 ` Randy Dunlap
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.0901301426390.3150@localhost.localdomain \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maksim.yevmenkin@gmail.com \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=will@crowder-design.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®