[PATCH v7 3/6] mm: Introduce VM_LOCKONFAULT
Eric B Munson
emunson at akamai.com
Tue Aug 25 07:29:02 PDT 2015
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 21-08-15 14:31:32, Eric B Munson wrote:
> > I am in the middle of implementing lock on fault this way, but I cannot
> > see how we will hanlde mremap of a lock on fault region. Say we have
> > the following:
> > addr = mmap(len, MAP_ANONYMOUS, ...);
> > mlock(addr, len, MLOCK_ONFAULT);
> > ...
> > mremap(addr, len, 2 * len, ...)
> > There is no way for mremap to know that the area being remapped was lock
> > on fault so it will be locked and prefaulted by remap. How can we avoid
> > this without tracking per vma if it was locked with lock or lock on
> > fault?
> Yes mremap is a problem and it is very much similar to mmap(MAP_LOCKED).
> It doesn't guarantee the full mlock semantic because it leaves partially
> populated ranges behind without reporting any error.
This was not my concern. Instead, I was wondering how to keep lock on
fault sematics with mremap if we do not have a VMA flag. As a user, it
would surprise me if a region I mlocked with lock on fault and then
remapped to a larger size was fully populated and locked by the mremap
> Considering the current behavior I do not thing it would be terrible
> thing to do what Konstantin was suggesting and populate only the full
> ranges in a best effort mode (it is done so anyway) and document the
> behavior properly.
> If the memory segment specified by old_address and old_size is
> locked (using mlock(2) or similar), then this lock is maintained
> when the segment is resized and/or relocated. As a consequence,
> the amount of memory locked by the process may change.
> If the range is already fully populated and the range is
> enlarged the new range is attempted to be fully populated
> as well to preserve the full mlock semantic but there is no
> guarantee this will succeed. Partially populated (e.g. created by
> mlock(MLOCK_ONFAULT)) ranges do not have the full mlock semantic
> so they are not populated on resize.
You are proposing that mremap would scan the PTEs as Vlastimil has
> So what we have as a result is that partially populated ranges are
> preserved and fully populated ones work in the best effort mode the same
> way as they are now.
> Does that sound at least remotely reasonably?
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the dri-devel