[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Describe race of direct read and fork for unaligned buffers
KOSAKI Motohiro <> writes:

> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Jeff Moyer <> wrote:
>> KOSAKI Motohiro <> writes:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> Thank you revisit this. But as far as my remember is correct, this issue is NOT
>>>> unaligned access issue. It's just get_user_pages(_fast) vs fork race issue. i.e.
>>>> DIRECT_IO w/ multi thread process should not use fork().
>>> The problem is, fork (and its COW logic) assume new access makes cow break,
>>> But page table protection can't detect a DMA write. Therefore DIO may override
>>> shared page data.
>> Hm, I've only seen this with misaligned or multiple sub-page-sized reads
>> in the same page.  AFAIR, aligned, page-sized I/O does not get split.
>> But, I could be wrong...
> If my remember is correct, the reproducer of past thread is misleading.
> dma_thread.c in
> has
> align parameter. But it doesn't only change align. Because of, every
> worker thread read 4K (pagesize), then
> - when offset is page aligned
> -> every page is accessed from only one worker
> - when offset is not page aligned
> -> every page is accessed from two workers
> But I don't remember why two threads are important things. hmm.. I'm
> looking into the code a while.
> Please don't 100% trust me.

I bet Andrea or Larry would remember the details.

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: 2012-05-01 18:01    [W:0.069 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site