All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
	bskeggs@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, jhubbard@nvidia.com,
	rcampbell@nvidia.com, jglisse@redhat.com, jgg@nvidia.com,
	hch@infradead.org, daniel@ffwll.ch, willy@infradead.org,
	bsingharora@gmail.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 08:24:27 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YKUDe8Oe4Y+q5Kxx@t490s> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3859486.fHISG1RMxY@nvdebian>

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 08:49:01PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> On Wednesday, 19 May 2021 7:16:38 AM AEST Peter Xu wrote:
> > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 06:42:35PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > +static bool try_to_protect(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > +                        unsigned long address, void *arg)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct ttp_args ttp = {
> > > +             .mm = mm,
> > > +             .address = address,
> > > +             .arg = arg,
> > > +             .valid = false,
> > > +     };
> > > +     struct rmap_walk_control rwc = {
> > > +             .rmap_one = try_to_protect_one,
> > > +             .done = page_not_mapped,
> > > +             .anon_lock = page_lock_anon_vma_read,
> > > +             .arg = &ttp,
> > > +     };
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * Restrict to anonymous pages for now to avoid potential writeback
> > > +      * issues.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (!PageAnon(page))
> > > +             return false;
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * During exec, a temporary VMA is setup and later moved.
> > > +      * The VMA is moved under the anon_vma lock but not the
> > > +      * page tables leading to a race where migration cannot
> > > +      * find the migration ptes. Rather than increasing the
> > > +      * locking requirements of exec(), migration skips
> > > +      * temporary VMAs until after exec() completes.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (!PageKsm(page) && PageAnon(page))
> > > +             rwc.invalid_vma = invalid_migration_vma;
> > > +
> > > +     rmap_walk(page, &rwc);
> > > +
> > > +     return ttp.valid && !page_mapcount(page);
> > > +}
> > 
> > I raised a question in the other thread regarding fork():
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YKQjmtMo+YQGx%2FwZ@t490s/
> > 
> > While I suddenly noticed that we may have similar issues even if we fork()
> > before creating the ptes.
> > 
> > In that case, we may see multiple read-only ptes pointing to the same page. 
> > We will convert all of them into device exclusive read ptes in rmap_walk()
> > above, however how do we guarantee after all COW done in the parent and all
> > the childs processes, the device owned page will be returned to the parent?
> 
> I assume you are talking about a fork() followed by a call to 
> make_device_exclusive()? I think this should be ok because 
> make_device_exclusive() always calls GUP with FOLL_WRITE both to break COW and 
> because a device performing atomic operations needs to write to the page. I 
> suppose a comment here highlighting the need to break COW to avoid this 
> scenario would be useful though.

Indeed, sorry for the false alarm!  Yes it would be great to mention that too.

-- 
Peter Xu


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
Cc: rcampbell@nvidia.com, willy@infradead.org, daniel@ffwll.ch,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
	bsingharora@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, hch@infradead.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, bskeggs@redhat.com, jgg@nvidia.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH v8 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 08:24:27 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YKUDe8Oe4Y+q5Kxx@t490s> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3859486.fHISG1RMxY@nvdebian>

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 08:49:01PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> On Wednesday, 19 May 2021 7:16:38 AM AEST Peter Xu wrote:
> > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 06:42:35PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > +static bool try_to_protect(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > +                        unsigned long address, void *arg)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct ttp_args ttp = {
> > > +             .mm = mm,
> > > +             .address = address,
> > > +             .arg = arg,
> > > +             .valid = false,
> > > +     };
> > > +     struct rmap_walk_control rwc = {
> > > +             .rmap_one = try_to_protect_one,
> > > +             .done = page_not_mapped,
> > > +             .anon_lock = page_lock_anon_vma_read,
> > > +             .arg = &ttp,
> > > +     };
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * Restrict to anonymous pages for now to avoid potential writeback
> > > +      * issues.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (!PageAnon(page))
> > > +             return false;
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * During exec, a temporary VMA is setup and later moved.
> > > +      * The VMA is moved under the anon_vma lock but not the
> > > +      * page tables leading to a race where migration cannot
> > > +      * find the migration ptes. Rather than increasing the
> > > +      * locking requirements of exec(), migration skips
> > > +      * temporary VMAs until after exec() completes.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (!PageKsm(page) && PageAnon(page))
> > > +             rwc.invalid_vma = invalid_migration_vma;
> > > +
> > > +     rmap_walk(page, &rwc);
> > > +
> > > +     return ttp.valid && !page_mapcount(page);
> > > +}
> > 
> > I raised a question in the other thread regarding fork():
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YKQjmtMo+YQGx%2FwZ@t490s/
> > 
> > While I suddenly noticed that we may have similar issues even if we fork()
> > before creating the ptes.
> > 
> > In that case, we may see multiple read-only ptes pointing to the same page. 
> > We will convert all of them into device exclusive read ptes in rmap_walk()
> > above, however how do we guarantee after all COW done in the parent and all
> > the childs processes, the device owned page will be returned to the parent?
> 
> I assume you are talking about a fork() followed by a call to 
> make_device_exclusive()? I think this should be ok because 
> make_device_exclusive() always calls GUP with FOLL_WRITE both to break COW and 
> because a device performing atomic operations needs to write to the page. I 
> suppose a comment here highlighting the need to break COW to avoid this 
> scenario would be useful though.

Indeed, sorry for the false alarm!  Yes it would be great to mention that too.

-- 
Peter Xu

_______________________________________________
Nouveau mailing list
Nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
Cc: rcampbell@nvidia.com, willy@infradead.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
	bsingharora@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, hch@infradead.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, jglisse@redhat.com, bskeggs@redhat.com,
	jgg@nvidia.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 08:24:27 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YKUDe8Oe4Y+q5Kxx@t490s> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3859486.fHISG1RMxY@nvdebian>

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 08:49:01PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> On Wednesday, 19 May 2021 7:16:38 AM AEST Peter Xu wrote:
> > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 06:42:35PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > +static bool try_to_protect(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > +                        unsigned long address, void *arg)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct ttp_args ttp = {
> > > +             .mm = mm,
> > > +             .address = address,
> > > +             .arg = arg,
> > > +             .valid = false,
> > > +     };
> > > +     struct rmap_walk_control rwc = {
> > > +             .rmap_one = try_to_protect_one,
> > > +             .done = page_not_mapped,
> > > +             .anon_lock = page_lock_anon_vma_read,
> > > +             .arg = &ttp,
> > > +     };
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * Restrict to anonymous pages for now to avoid potential writeback
> > > +      * issues.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (!PageAnon(page))
> > > +             return false;
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * During exec, a temporary VMA is setup and later moved.
> > > +      * The VMA is moved under the anon_vma lock but not the
> > > +      * page tables leading to a race where migration cannot
> > > +      * find the migration ptes. Rather than increasing the
> > > +      * locking requirements of exec(), migration skips
> > > +      * temporary VMAs until after exec() completes.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (!PageKsm(page) && PageAnon(page))
> > > +             rwc.invalid_vma = invalid_migration_vma;
> > > +
> > > +     rmap_walk(page, &rwc);
> > > +
> > > +     return ttp.valid && !page_mapcount(page);
> > > +}
> > 
> > I raised a question in the other thread regarding fork():
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YKQjmtMo+YQGx%2FwZ@t490s/
> > 
> > While I suddenly noticed that we may have similar issues even if we fork()
> > before creating the ptes.
> > 
> > In that case, we may see multiple read-only ptes pointing to the same page. 
> > We will convert all of them into device exclusive read ptes in rmap_walk()
> > above, however how do we guarantee after all COW done in the parent and all
> > the childs processes, the device owned page will be returned to the parent?
> 
> I assume you are talking about a fork() followed by a call to 
> make_device_exclusive()? I think this should be ok because 
> make_device_exclusive() always calls GUP with FOLL_WRITE both to break COW and 
> because a device performing atomic operations needs to write to the page. I 
> suppose a comment here highlighting the need to break COW to avoid this 
> scenario would be useful though.

Indeed, sorry for the false alarm!  Yes it would be great to mention that too.

-- 
Peter Xu


  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-19 12:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 127+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-07  8:42 [PATCH v8 0/8] Add support for SVM atomics in Nouveau Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 1/8] mm: Remove special swap entry functions Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-18  2:17   ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18  2:17     ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18  2:17     ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-18 11:58     ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 11:58       ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 11:58       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 14:17       ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 14:17         ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 14:17         ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 2/8] mm/swapops: Rework swap entry manipulation code Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 20:04   ` Liam Howlett
2021-05-18 20:04     ` Liam Howlett
2021-05-18 20:04     ` [Nouveau] " Liam Howlett
2021-05-19 12:38     ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:38       ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:38       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-20 20:24       ` Liam Howlett
2021-05-20 20:24         ` Liam Howlett
2021-05-20 20:24         ` [Nouveau] " Liam Howlett
2021-05-21  2:23         ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-21  2:23           ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-21  2:23           ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 4/8] mm/rmap: Split migration into its own function Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-18  2:08   ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18  2:08     ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18  2:08     ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-18 13:19     ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 13:19       ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 13:19       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 17:27       ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 17:27         ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 17:27         ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-18 17:33         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 17:33           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 17:33           ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 18:01           ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 18:01             ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 18:01             ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-18 19:45             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 19:45               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 19:45               ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 20:29               ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 20:29                 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 20:29                 ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-18 23:03                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 23:03                   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 23:03                   ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 23:45                   ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 23:45                     ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 23:45                     ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-19 11:04                     ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 11:04                       ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 11:04                       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:15                       ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:15                         ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:15                         ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-19 13:11                         ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 13:11                           ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 13:11                           ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 14:04                           ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 14:04                             ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 14:04                             ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-19 13:28                     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 13:28                       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 13:28                       ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 14:09                       ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 14:09                         ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 14:09                         ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-19 18:11                         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 18:11                           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 18:11                           ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 11:35         ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 11:35           ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 11:35           ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:21           ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:21             ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:21             ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:46             ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:46               ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:46               ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-21  6:53       ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-21  6:53         ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-21  6:53         ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 21:16   ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 21:16     ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 21:16     ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-19 10:49     ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 10:49       ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 10:49       ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:24       ` Peter Xu [this message]
2021-05-19 12:24         ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:24         ` [Nouveau] " Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:46         ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:46           ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:46           ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 6/8] mm: Selftests for exclusive device memory Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 7/8] nouveau/svm: Refactor nouveau_range_fault Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42 ` [PATCH v8 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07  8:42   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-05-21  4:04   ` Ben Skeggs
2021-05-21  4:04     ` Ben Skeggs
2021-05-21  4:04     ` [Nouveau] " Ben Skeggs
2021-05-21  4:04     ` Ben Skeggs
2021-05-06  7:43 ` [PATCH v8 0/8] Add support for SVM atomics in Nouveau Alistair Popple
2021-05-06  7:43   ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-06  7:43   ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YKUDe8Oe4Y+q5Kxx@t490s \
    --to=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=bskeggs@redhat.com \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=rcampbell@nvidia.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.