Re: [PATCH -V7 05/14] hugetlb: avoid taking i_mmap_mutex inunmap_single_vma() for hugetlb

[Aneesh Kumar K.V]

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 06:57:47PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> 
> > From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > i_mmap_mutex lock was added in unmap_single_vma by 502717f4e ("hugetlb:
> > fix linked list corruption in unmap_hugepage_range()") but we don't use
> > page->lru in unmap_hugepage_range any more.  Also the lock was taken
> > higher up in the stack in some code path.  That would result in deadlock.
> > 
> > unmap_mapping_range (i_mmap_mutex)
> >  -> unmap_mapping_range_tree
> >     -> unmap_mapping_range_vma
> >        -> zap_page_range_single
> >          -> unmap_single_vma
> > 	      -> unmap_hugepage_range (i_mmap_mutex)
> > 
> 
> You should be able to show this with lockdep?

I was not able to get a lockdep report

> 
> > For shared pagetable support for huge pages, since pagetable pages are ref
> > counted we don't need any lock during huge_pmd_unshare.  We do take
> > i_mmap_mutex in huge_pmd_share while walking the vma_prio_tree in mapping.
> > (39dde65c9940c97f ("shared page table for hugetlb page")).
> > 
> 
> I think this should be folded into patch 4, the code you're removing here 
> is just added in that function unnecessarily.
> 

I am removing i_mmap_mutex in this patch. That is not added in patch 4.

-aneesh

--
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/