[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:0.027 / U:43.768 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site