From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.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: Fri, 21 May 2021 16:53:29 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1959488.yZHLR0KveG@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47694715.suB6H4Uo8R@nvdebian>
On Tuesday, 18 May 2021 11:19:05 PM AEST Alistair Popple wrote:
[...]
> > > +/*
> > > + * Restore a potential device exclusive pte to a working pte entry
> > > + */
> > > +static vm_fault_t remove_device_exclusive_entry(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > > +{
> > > + struct page *page = vmf->page;
> > > + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
> > > + struct page_vma_mapped_walk pvmw = {
> > > + .page = page,
> > > + .vma = vma,
> > > + .address = vmf->address,
> > > + .flags = PVMW_SYNC,
> > > + };
> > > + vm_fault_t ret = 0;
> > > + struct mmu_notifier_range range;
> > > +
> > > + if (!lock_page_or_retry(page, vma->vm_mm, vmf->flags))
> > > + return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
> > > + mmu_notifier_range_init(&range, MMU_NOTIFY_CLEAR, 0, vma,
> > > vma->vm_mm,
> > > + vmf->address & PAGE_MASK,
> > > + (vmf->address & PAGE_MASK) + PAGE_SIZE);
> > > + mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(&range);
> >
> > I looked at MMU_NOTIFIER_CLEAR document and it tells me:
> >
> > * @MMU_NOTIFY_CLEAR: clear page table entry (many reasons for this like
> > * madvise() or replacing a page by another one, ...).
> >
> > Does MMU_NOTIFIER_CLEAR suite for this case? Normally I think for such a
> > case (existing pte is invalid) we don't need to notify at all. However
> > from what I read from the whole series, this seems to be a critical point
> > where we'd like to kick the owner/driver to synchronously stop doing
> > atomic
> > operations from the device. Not sure whether we'd like a new notifier
> > type, or maybe at least comment on why to use CLEAR?
>
> Right, notifying the owner/driver when it no longer has exclusive access to
> the page and allowing it to stop atomic operations is the critical point and
> why it notifies when we ordinarily wouldn't (ie. invalid -> valid).
>
> I did consider adding a new type, but in the driver implementation it ends
> up
> being treated the same as a CLEAR notification anyway so didn't think it was
> necessary. But I suppose adding a different type would allow other listening
> notifiers to filter these which might be worthwhile.
>
> > > +
> > > + while (page_vma_mapped_walk(&pvmw)) {
> >
> > IIUC a while loop of page_vma_mapped_walk() handles thps, however here
> > it's
> > already in do_swap_page() so it's small pte only? Meanwhile...
> >
> > > + if (unlikely(!pte_same(*pvmw.pte, vmf->orig_pte))) {
> > > + page_vma_mapped_walk_done(&pvmw);
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + restore_exclusive_pte(vma, page, pvmw.address, pvmw.pte);
> >
> > ... I'm not sure whether passing in page would work for thp after all, as
> > iiuc we may need to pass in the subpage rather than the head page if so.
>
> Hmm, I need to check this and follow up.
Thanks Peter for pointing that out. I needed to follow this up because I had
slightly misunderstood page_vma_mapped_walk(). As you say this is actually a
small pte and restore_exclusive_pte() needs the actual page from the fault. So
I should be able to drop the page_vma_mapped_walk() and use
pte_offset_map_lock() to call restore_exclusive_pte directly.
- Alistair
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-21 6:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ 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 ` [PATCH v8 1/8] mm: Remove special swap entry functions Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 2:17 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 11:58 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 14:17 ` 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 ` [PATCH v8 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 20:04 ` Liam Howlett
2021-05-19 12:38 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-20 20:24 ` Liam Howlett
2021-05-21 2:23 ` 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 ` [PATCH v8 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 2:08 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 13:19 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-18 17:27 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 17:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 18:01 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 19:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 20:29 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-18 23:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-18 23:45 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 11:04 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:15 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 13:11 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 14:04 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 13:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 14:09 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 18:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-19 11:35 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:21 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:46 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-21 6:53 ` Alistair Popple [this message]
2021-05-18 21:16 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 10:49 ` Alistair Popple
2021-05-19 12:24 ` Peter Xu
2021-05-19 12:46 ` Alistair Popple
2021-04-07 8:42 ` [PATCH v8 6/8] mm: Selftests for exclusive device memory Alistair Popple
2021-04-07 8:42 ` [PATCH v8 7/8] nouveau/svm: Refactor nouveau_range_fault Alistair Popple
2021-04-07 8:42 ` [PATCH v8 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access Alistair Popple
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
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=1959488.yZHLR0KveG@nvdebian \
--to=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--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=peterx@redhat.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).