On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 01:10:01PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > 
> > Because do_brk does vma manipulations, for this reason it's
> > running under down_write_killable(&mm->mmap_sem). Or you
> > mean something else?
> Yes, all we need the new lock for is to get a consistent view on brk
> values. I am simply asking whether there is something fundamentally
> wrong by doing the update inside the new lock while keeping the original
> mmap_sem locking in the brk path. That would allow us to drop the
> mmap_sem lock in the proc path when looking at brk values.

Michal gimme some time. I guess  we might do so, but I need some
spare time to take more precise look into the code, hopefully today
evening. Also I've a suspicion that we've wracked check_data_rlimit
with this new lock in prctl. Need to verify it again.

Reply via email to