[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: lockdep annotate root inode properly
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:19:27 -0600
Tyler Hicks <> wrote:

> >
> >
> > Sigh. Was lockdep_annotate_inode_mutex_key() sufficiently
> > self-explanatory to justify leaving it undocumented?
> >
> > <goes off and reads e096d0c7e2e>
> >
> > OK, the patch looks correct given the explanation in e096d0c7e2e, but
> > I'd like to understand why it becomes necessary only now.
> >
> > > NOTE: This patch also require
> > >
> > > to remove the lockdep warning
> >
> > And that patch has been basically ignored.
> Al commented on it here:
> He said that while my patch is correct, taking i_mutex inside mmap_sem
> is still wrong.

OK, thanks, yup. Taking i_mutex in file_operations.mmap() is wrong.

Is hugetlbfs actually deadlockable because of this, or is it the case
that the i_mutex->mmap_sem ordering happens to never happen for this
filesystem? Although we shouldn't go and create incompatible lock
ranking rules for different filesystems!

So we need to pull the i_mutex out of hugetlbfs_file_mmap(). What's it
actually trying to do in there? If we switch to
i_size_read()/i_size_write() then AFAICT the problem comes down to

hugetlb_reserve_pages() fiddles with i_mapping->private_list and the fs
owns private_list and is free to use a lock other than i_mutex to
protect it. (In fact i_mapping.private_lock is the usual lock for

So from a quick scan here I'm thinking that a decent fix is to remove
the i_mutex locking from hugetlbfs_file_mmap(), switch
hugetlbfs_file_mmap() to i_size_read/write then use a hugetlb-private
lock to protect i_mapping->private_list. region_chg() will do
GFP_KERNEL allocations under that lock, so some care is needed.

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-08 22:43    [W:0.080 / U:0.280 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site