Re: [GIT PULL] please pull ummunotify

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> Roland Dreier wrote:
> >  > Can I this version already solved fork() + COW issue? if so, could you
> >  > please explain what happen at fork. Obviously RDMA point to either parent
> >  > or child page, not both. but Corrent COW rule is, first touch process
> >  > get copyed page and other process still own original page. I think it's 
> >  > unpecected behavior form RDMA.
> >
> > No, ummunotify doesn't really help that much with fork() + COW.  If a
> > parent forks and then touches pages that are actively in use for RDMA,
> > then of course they get COWed and RDMA goes to the wrong memory (from
> > the point of view of the parent).
> >   
> 
> My understanding of the code is that fork will end-up calling
> copy_page_range() on all VMA, and copy_page_range() calls
> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() if  is_cow_mapping() is true,
> which should be the case here. So you should get some invalidate events
> on fork.

Worried...
Anybody haven't test fork() case yet???



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/