Re: [PATCH 14/15] mm: numa: Flush TLB if NUMA hinting faults racewith PTE scan update

[Rik van Riel]

On 12/05/2013 02:54 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:

> I think that's a better fit and a neater fix. Thanks! I think it barriers
> more than it needs to (definite cost vs maybe cost), the flush can be
> deferred until we are definitely trying to migrate and the pte case is
> not guaranteed to be flushed before migration due to pte_mknonnuma causing
> a flush in ptep_clear_flush to be avoided later. Mashing the two patches
> together yields this.

I think this would fix the numa migrate case.

However, I believe the same issue is also present in
mprotect(..., PROT_NONE) vs. compaction, for programs
that trap SIGSEGV for garbage collection purposes.

They could lose modifications done in-between when
the pte was set to PROT_NONE, and the actual TLB
flush, if compaction moves the page around in-between
those two events.

I don't know if this is a case we need to worry about
at all, but I think the same fix would apply to that
code path, so I guess we might as well make it...
--
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/