[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] revoke: misc fixes
Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> Pekka J Enberg wrote:
>>> /*
>>>- * Not holding ->mmap_sem here.
>>>+ * Not holding ->mmap_sem here but we must watch out for page
>>>+ * faults and after the shared mappings have been taken down
>>>+ * and sys_mmap() trying to remap the revoked range.
>>> */
>>> vma->vm_flags |= VM_REVOKED;
>>> smp_mb();
>>>@@ -455,7 +457,7 @@ int err = 0;
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
>>You're still modifying vm_flags without down_write mmap_sem, so this will
>>corrupt vm_flags.
> Uhm, you're right, two concurrent writes and we can lose some bits so a
> barrier doesn't work. Too bad as we're under mapping->i_mmap_lock here and
> thus cannot take ->mmap_sep...

Could you try something like walk the i_mmap lists to find mms with vmas that
haven't need revoking, then each time you find one, take a ref on the mm, drop
i_mmap_lock, take mmap_sem, and walk all its vmas looking for any that reference
the inode?

Bit of a roundabout way to go, but it might work.

SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-16 08:41    [W:0.105 / U:2.524 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site