Re: [PATCH v11 07/14] mm: multi-gen LRU: exploit locality in rmap

From: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
To: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
Cc: "Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, "Andi Kleen" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	"Aneesh Kumar" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Hillf Danton" <hdanton@sina.com>, "Jens Axboe" <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Matthew Wilcox" <willy@infradead.org>,
	"Mel Gorman" <mgorman@suse.de>,
	"Michael Larabel" <Michael@michaellarabel.com>,
	"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@kernel.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>, "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	LAK <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Linux Doc Mailing List" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
	"Kernel Page Reclaim v2" <page-reclaim@google.com>,
	"Brian Geffon" <bgeffon@google.com>,
	"Jan Alexander Steffens" <heftig@archlinux.org>,
	"Oleksandr Natalenko" <oleksandr@natalenko.name>,
	"Steven Barrett" <steven@liquorix.net>,
	"Suleiman Souhlal" <suleiman@google.com>,
	"Daniel Byrne" <djbyrne@mtu.edu>,
	"Donald Carr" <d@chaos-reins.com>,
	"Holger Hoffstätte" <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>,
	"Konstantin Kharlamov" <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>,
	"Shuang Zhai" <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>,
	"Sofia Trinh" <sofia.trinh@edi.works>,
	"Vaibhav Jain" <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>,
	huzhanyuan@oppo.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/14] mm: multi-gen LRU: exploit locality in rmap
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 13:07:11 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOUHufbi7h6siHdnhsAEiXaCoNrUs9bUnEihYouE4CNMt-Zd_w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4w3S_8Kaw2GyB3hg7b4N_D+6yBO7D6qmgxD9Fqz3_dhAg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 1:37 AM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 9:25 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 4:49 PM Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> wrote:

...

> I can't really explain why we are getting a random app/java vm crash in monkey
> test by using ptep_test_and_clear_young() only in lru_gen_look_around() on an
> armv8-a machine without hardware PTE young support.
>
> Moving to  ptep_clear_flush_young() in look_around can make the random
> hang disappear according to zhanyuan(Cc-ed).

This sounds too familiar -- let me ask again: was the following commit
included during the test?

  07509e10dcc7 arm64: pgtable: Fix pte_accessible()

If not, it will cause exactly the problem you described. And what
about this one?

  e914d8f00391 mm: fix unexpected zeroed page mapping with zram swap

Missing it also causes userspace memory corruption on Android, i.e.,
random app crashes.

> On x86, ptep_clear_flush_young() is exactly ptep_test_and_clear_young()
> after
>  'commit b13b1d2d8692 ("x86/mm: In the PTE swapout page reclaim case clear
> the accessed bit instead of flushing the TLB")'
>
> But on arm64, they are different. according to Will's comments in this
> thread which
> tried to make arm64 same with x86,
> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1793881.html
>
> "
> This is blindly copied from x86 and isn't true for us: we don't invalidate
> the TLB on context switch. That means our window for keeping the stale
> entries around is potentially much bigger and might not be a great idea.
>
> If we roll a TLB invalidation routine without the trailing DSB, what sort of
> performance does that get you?
> "
> We shouldn't think ptep_clear_flush_young() is safe enough in LRU to
> clear PTE young? Any comments from Will?
>
> >
> > btw, lru_gen_look_around() has already included 'address', are we doing
> > pte check for 'address' twice here?

Explained in the previous reply. Hope that clarifies things.