[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/userptr: Hold mmref whilst calling get-user-pages
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Tue Apr 5 12:22:43 UTC 2016
On 03/04/16 18:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Holding a reference to the containing task_struct is not sufficient to
> prevent the mm_struct from being reaped under memory pressure. If this
> happens whilst we are calling get_user_pages(), explosions errupt -
> sometimes an immediate GPF, sometimes page flag corruption. To prevent
> the target mm from being reaped as we are reading from it, acquire a
> reference before we begin.
>
> Testcase: igt/gem_shrink/*userptr
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> Cc: MichaĆ Winiarski <michal.winiarski at intel.com>
> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 92b39186b05a..960bb37f458f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -547,19 +547,24 @@ __i915_gem_userptr_get_pages_worker(struct work_struct *_work)
> if (pvec != NULL) {
> struct mm_struct *mm = obj->userptr.mm->mm;
>
> - down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> - while (pinned < npages) {
> - ret = get_user_pages_remote(work->task, mm,
> - obj->userptr.ptr + pinned * PAGE_SIZE,
> - npages - pinned,
> - !obj->userptr.read_only, 0,
> - pvec + pinned, NULL);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - break;
> -
> - pinned += ret;
> + ret = -EFAULT;
> + if (atomic_inc_not_zero(&mm->mm_users)) {
> + down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + while (pinned < npages) {
> + ret = get_user_pages_remote
> + (work->task, mm,
> + obj->userptr.ptr + pinned * PAGE_SIZE,
> + npages - pinned,
> + !obj->userptr.read_only, 0,
> + pvec + pinned, NULL);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + break;
> +
> + pinned += ret;
> + }
> + up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + mmput(mm);
> }
> - up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> }
>
> mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
>
Strange, doesn't this mean that the atomic_inc(¤t->mm->mm_count)
is not doing what we thought it would?
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list