On 18/08/2020 02:58, Chinwen Chang wrote:
smaps_rollup will try to grab mmap_lock and go through the whole vma
list until it finishes the iterating. When encountering large processes,
the mmap_lock will be held for a longer time, which may block other
write requests like mmap and munmap from progressing smoothly.
There are upcoming mmap_lock optimizations like range-based locks, but
the lock applied to smaps_rollup would be the coarse type, which doesn't
avoid the occurrence of unpleasant contention.
To solve aforementioned issue, we add a check which detects whether
anyone wants to grab mmap_lock for write attempts.
Change since v1:
- If current VMA is freed after dropping the lock, it will return
- incomplete result. To fix this issue, refine the code flow as
- suggested by Steve. [1]
Change since v2:
- When getting back the mmap lock, the address where you stopped last
- time could now be in the middle of a vma. Add one more check to handle
- this case as suggested by Michel. [2]
Change since v3:
- last_stopped is easily confused with last_vma_end. Replace it with
- a direct call to smap_gather_stats(vma, &mss, last_vma_end) as
- suggested by Steve. [3]
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/bf40676e-b14b-44cd-75ce-419c70194...@arm.com/
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cann689ftcsc71cjajs0gpspohgo_hrj+diwsou1wr98ypkt...@mail.gmail.com/
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/db0d40e2-72f3-09d5-c162-9c49218f1...@arm.com/
Signed-off-by: Chinwen Chang <chinwen.ch...@mediatek.com>
CC: Steven Price <steven.pr...@arm.com>
CC: Michel Lespinasse <wal...@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Price <steven.pr...@arm.com>
---
fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
index 76e623a..1a80624 100644
--- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
+++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
@@ -867,9 +867,73 @@ static int show_smaps_rollup(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
hold_task_mempolicy(priv);
- for (vma = priv->mm->mmap; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
+ for (vma = priv->mm->mmap; vma;) {
smap_gather_stats(vma, &mss, 0);
last_vma_end = vma->vm_end;
+
+ /*
+ * Release mmap_lock temporarily if someone wants to
+ * access it for write request.
+ */
+ if (mmap_lock_is_contended(mm)) {
+ mmap_read_unlock(mm);
+ ret = mmap_read_lock_killable(mm);
+ if (ret) {
+ release_task_mempolicy(priv);
+ goto out_put_mm;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * After dropping the lock, there are four cases to
+ * consider. See the following example for explanation.
+ *
+ * +------+------+-----------+
+ * | VMA1 | VMA2 | VMA3 |
+ * +------+------+-----------+
+ * | | | |
+ * 4k 8k 16k 400k
+ *
+ * Suppose we drop the lock after reading VMA2 due to
+ * contention, then we get:
+ *
+ * last_vma_end = 16k
+ *
+ * 1) VMA2 is freed, but VMA3 exists:
+ *
+ * find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA3.
+ * In this case, just continue from VMA3.
+ *
+ * 2) VMA2 still exists:
+ *
+ * find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA2.
+ * Iterate the loop like the original one.
+ *
+ * 3) No more VMAs can be found:
+ *
+ * find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return NULL.
+ * No more things to do, just break.
+ *
+ * 4) (last_vma_end - 1) is the middle of a vma (VMA'):
+ *
+ * find_vma(mm, 16k - 1) will return VMA' whose range
+ * contains last_vma_end.
+ * Iterate VMA' from last_vma_end.
+ */
+ vma = find_vma(mm, last_vma_end - 1);
+ /* Case 3 above */
+ if (!vma)
+ break;
+
+ /* Case 1 above */
+ if (vma->vm_start >= last_vma_end)
+ continue;
+
+ /* Case 4 above */
+ if (vma->vm_end > last_vma_end)
+ smap_gather_stats(vma, &mss, last_vma_end);
+ }
+ /* Case 2 above */
+ vma = vma->vm_next;
}
show_vma_header_prefix(m, priv->mm->mmap->vm_start,
