Re: [RFC] [PATCH 2.6.37-rc5-tip 8/20] 8: uprobes: mmap and forkhooks.

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 15:28 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> +void uprobe_mmap(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> +{
> +       struct list_head tmp_list;
> +       struct uprobe *uprobe, *u;
> +       struct mm_struct *mm;
> +       struct inode *inode;
> +
> +       if (!valid_vma(vma))
> +               return;
> +
> +       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&tmp_list);
> +
> +       /*
> +        * The vma was just allocated and this routine gets called
> +        * while holding write lock for mmap_sem.  Function called
> +        * in context of a thread that has a reference to mm.
> +        * Hence no need to take a reference to mm
> +        */
> +       mm = vma->vm_mm;
> +       up_write(&mm->mmap_sem);

Are you very very sure its a good thing to simply drop the mmap_sem
here? Also, why?

> +       mutex_lock(&uprobes_mutex);
> +
> +       inode = vma->vm_file->f_mapping->host;

Since you just dropped the mmap_sem, what's keeping that vma from going
away?

> +       add_to_temp_list(vma, inode, &tmp_list);
> +
> +       list_for_each_entry_safe(uprobe, u, &tmp_list, pending_list) {
> +               mm->uprobes_vaddr = vma->vm_start + uprobe->offset;
> +               install_uprobe(mm, uprobe);
> +               list_del(&uprobe->pending_list);
> +       }
> +       mutex_unlock(&uprobes_mutex);
> +       down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> +} 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/