From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F258C433E2 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 15:51:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0ED20BED for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 15:51:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ziepe.ca header.i=@ziepe.ca header.b="OLk8h2bg" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731362AbgIJPvP (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2020 11:51:15 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39980 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731427AbgIJPsr (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2020 11:48:47 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x743.google.com (mail-qk1-x743.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::743]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A966CC06135F for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 08:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x743.google.com with SMTP id q63so5609830qkf.3 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 08:10:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ziepe.ca; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=IGv0f01H1HhwMLTOhjZhfHu2g8LxVsJgV1pDEfYUgDw=; b=OLk8h2bgkMx23a6lKAISLlfAQbxOdT1UvNWDM9Zk6DHatbSGVbAHhfj7/QkR54l1rm 7d91OLwa5I5BFDa46HUCe2u5YIKKF7iZkfQGVUZwXBkVLOtQU1rMTEuS2YOP/A4N28Nh OaR3h6vYn2g6YHgjvbU6b6KqfQkKa4ZNKWFkzx5yRTFbAouWKSLG0Y+HJuXypLnRDO1C /p+eopFDX9lOqXJ5iyilR1G0IS0msV2EgzUi/8XlGm0UwB0i+O4JYL5JY9QXWMDvYWiy JaCFeMCQ8DYNgBrrdkRhDwMsvdOgF8w7kYFilEVYxP/+fBz702MoGQCz4e65/5fZS+Qk h+2Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=IGv0f01H1HhwMLTOhjZhfHu2g8LxVsJgV1pDEfYUgDw=; b=qpxLDk1/C1nKdWdADe6oN0aVSwuoCFZyOQ+3vZ4wHDrVgT3xENjkiZCEgOwoHfR4if k2rFoF+K5F4Fz0CUycMiGnbRqcvRvf28THI0J0UqaMNzjV2JT7PVYahP5z7DkuJaDaOJ kCYHVGkZw6xmoHa/TG7QWUcwQNCvByerZtnCvSBbZjjRdcIlEA/DneuGbfWs0HPNAjfC QfJt9crakaG22AUxlHyUg8F2XdOQPj/uZH4bEEdTN8nTkSUbePlEjNOIEjT2hAnr6lpP 3576CWCjXgANyZ4+ab0Its650sx1e7lBLzxA5d3a92F3HLxYRRLXxTk+1eQbyc/jyRP0 F4eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531wrKdRpxSog/upGgDx8OBoELO4M39jdqsC9El19N+FjOvtuakH xA5rVkFJwNPF4CsEyr+AApgk6w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJykgWiu1zjU+K7XkGZJ7ie1IxH4yzDlIW/0m/WeyP2P7YrPQaO2mutyhA53lMDex0T4CRnGTg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:141a:: with SMTP id d26mr7906055qkj.97.1599750628651; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 08:10:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ziepe.ca (hlfxns017vw-156-34-48-30.dhcp-dynamic.fibreop.ns.bellaliant.net. [156.34.48.30]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z74sm6914588qkb.11.2020.09.10.08.10.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 10 Sep 2020 08:10:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jgg by mlx with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kGODS-004MNk-Mg; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:10:26 -0300 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:10:26 -0300 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Gerald Schaefer , Anshuman Khandual Cc: Alexander Gordeev , Dave Hansen , John Hubbard , LKML , linux-mm , linux-arch , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Russell King , Mike Rapoport , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Michael Ellerman , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Jeff Dike , Richard Weinberger , Dave Hansen , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Arnd Bergmann , Andrey Ryabinin , linux-x86 , linux-arm , linux-power , linux-sparc , linux-um , linux-s390 , Vasily Gorbik , Heiko Carstens , Christian Borntraeger , Claudio Imbrenda Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] mm/gup: fix gup_fast with dynamic page table folding Message-ID: <20200910151026.GL87483@ziepe.ca> References: <20200907180058.64880-1-gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com> <20200907180058.64880-2-gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com> <0dbc6ec8-45ea-0853-4856-2bc1e661a5a5@intel.com> <20200909142904.00b72921@thinkpad> <20200909192534.442f8984@thinkpad> <20200909180324.GI87483@ziepe.ca> <20200910093925.GB29166@oc3871087118.ibm.com> <20200910130233.GK87483@ziepe.ca> <20200910152803.1a930afc@thinkpad> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200910152803.1a930afc@thinkpad> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 03:28:03PM +0200, Gerald Schaefer wrote: > On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:02:33 -0300 > Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 11:39:25AM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > > > > > As Gerald mentioned, it is very difficult to explain in a clear way. > > > Hopefully, one could make sense ot of it. > > > > I would say the page table API requires this invariant: > > > > pud = pud_offset(p4d, addr); > > do { > > WARN_ON(pud != pud_offset(p4d, addr); > > next = pud_addr_end(addr, end); > > } while (pud++, addr = next, addr != end); > > > > ie pud++ is supposed to be a shortcut for > > pud_offset(p4d, next) > > > > While S390 does not follow this. Fixing addr_end brings it into > > alignment by preventing pud++ from happening. > > > > The only currently known side effect is that gup_fast crashes, but it > > sure is an unexpected thing. > > It only is unexpected in a "top-level folding" world, see my other reply. > Consider it an optimization, which was possible because of how our dynamic > folding works, and e.g. because we can determine the correct pagetable > level from a pXd value in pXd_offset. No, I disagree. The page walker API the arch presents has to have well defined semantics. For instance, there is an effort to define tests and invarients for the page table accesses to bring this understanding and uniformity: mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c If we fix S390 using the pX_addr_end() change then the above should be updated with an invariant to check it. I've added Anshuman for some thoughts.. For better or worse, that invariant does exclude arches from using other folding techniques. The other solution would be to address the other side of != and adjust the pud++ eg replcae pud++ with something like: pud = pud_next_entry(p4d, pud, next) Such that: pud_next_entry(p4d, pud, next) === pud_offset(p4d, next) In which case the invarient changes to 'callers can never do pointer arithmetic on the result of pXX_offset()' which is a bit harder to enforce. Jason