From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>, Donald Dutile <ddutile@redhat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Liang Zhang <zhangliang5@huawei.com>,
Pedro Gomes <pedrodemargomes@gmail.com>,
Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@gmail.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/7] s390/pgtable: support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 12:06:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <655640d5-3886-c4fb-6531-3148fd90e3d5@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220316115654.12823b78@thinkpad>
On 16.03.22 11:56, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 18:12:16 +0100
> David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15.03.22 17:58, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>
>>>>> This would mean that it is not OK to have bit 52 not zero for swap PTEs.
>>>>> But if I read the POP correctly, all bits except for the DAT-protection
>>>>> would be ignored for invalid PTEs, so maybe this comment needs some update
>>>>> (for both bits 52 and also 55).
>>>>>
>>>>> Heiko might also have some more insight.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, I wonder why we should get a specification exception when the
>>>> PTE is invalid. I'll dig a bit into the PoP.
>>>
>>> SA22-7832-12 6-46 ("Translation-Specification Exception") is clearer
>>>
>>> "The page-table entry used for the translation is
>>> valid, and bit position 52 does not contain zero."
>>>
>>> "The page-table entry used for the translation is
>>> valid, EDAT-1 does not apply, the instruction-exe-
>>> cution-protection facility is not installed, and bit
>>> position 55 does not contain zero. It is model
>>> dependent whether this condition is recognized."
>>>
>>
>> I wonder if the following matches reality:
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index 008a6c856fa4..6a227a8c3712 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -1669,18 +1669,16 @@ static inline int has_transparent_hugepage(void)
>> /*
>> * 64 bit swap entry format:
>> * A page-table entry has some bits we have to treat in a special way.
>> - * Bits 52 and bit 55 have to be zero, otherwise a specification
>> - * exception will occur instead of a page translation exception. The
>> - * specification exception has the bad habit not to store necessary
>> - * information in the lowcore.
>> * Bits 54 and 63 are used to indicate the page type.
>> * A swap pte is indicated by bit pattern (pte & 0x201) == 0x200
>> - * This leaves the bits 0-51 and bits 56-62 to store type and offset.
>> - * We use the 5 bits from 57-61 for the type and the 52 bits from 0-51
>> - * for the offset.
>> - * | offset |01100|type |00|
>> + * | offset |XX1XX|type |S0|
>> * |0000000000111111111122222222223333333333444444444455|55555|55566|66|
>> * |0123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901|23456|78901|23|
>> + *
>> + * Bits 0-51 store the offset.
>> + * Bits 57-62 store the type.
>> + * Bit 62 (S) is used for softdirty tracking.
>> + * Bits 52, 53, 55 and 56 (X) are unused.
>> */
>>
>> #define __SWP_OFFSET_MASK ((1UL << 52) - 1)
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure why bit 53 was indicated as "1" and bit 55 was indicated as
>> "0". At least for 52 and 55 there was a clear description.
>
> Bit 53 is the invalid bit, and that is always 1 for swap ptes, in addition
Ah, right, I missed the meaning of bot 53 because this documentation is just
sub-optimal.
> to protection bit 54. Bit 55, along with bit 52, has to be zero according
> to the (potentially deprecated) comment.
Yeah, that 52/55 comment is just wrong when dealing with invalid PTEs.
>
> It is interesting that bit 56 seems to be unused, at least according
> to the comment, but that would also mention bit 62 as unused, so that
> clearly needs some update.
I currently have the following cleanup patch:
From a4a8db2920e035e90a410b9170829326bb1fab92 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 18:14:09 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] s390/pgtable: cleanup description of swp pte layout
Bit 52 and bit 55 don't have to be zero: they only trigger a
translation-specifiation exception if the PTE is marked as valid, which
is not the case for swap ptes.
Document which bits are used for what, and which ones are unused.
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h | 17 ++++++++---------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
index 008a6c856fa4..64fbe5fd3853 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
@@ -1669,18 +1669,17 @@ static inline int has_transparent_hugepage(void)
/*
* 64 bit swap entry format:
* A page-table entry has some bits we have to treat in a special way.
- * Bits 52 and bit 55 have to be zero, otherwise a specification
- * exception will occur instead of a page translation exception. The
- * specification exception has the bad habit not to store necessary
- * information in the lowcore.
- * Bits 54 and 63 are used to indicate the page type.
+ * Bits 54 and 63 are used to indicate the page type. Bit 53 marks the pte
+ * as invalid.
* A swap pte is indicated by bit pattern (pte & 0x201) == 0x200
- * This leaves the bits 0-51 and bits 56-62 to store type and offset.
- * We use the 5 bits from 57-61 for the type and the 52 bits from 0-51
- * for the offset.
- * | offset |01100|type |00|
+ * | offset |X11XX|type |S0|
* |0000000000111111111122222222223333333333444444444455|55555|55566|66|
* |0123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901|23456|78901|23|
+ *
+ * Bits 0-51 store the offset.
+ * Bits 57-61 store the type.
+ * Bit 62 (S) is used for softdirty tracking.
+ * Bits 52, 55 and 56 (X) are unused.
*/
#define __SWP_OFFSET_MASK ((1UL << 52) - 1)
--
2.35.1
>
> If bit 56 could be used for _PAGE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE, that would be better
> than stealing a bit from the offset, or using potentially dangerous
> bit 52. It is defined as _PAGE_UNUSED and only used for kvm, not sure
> if this is also relevant for swap ptes, similar to bit 62.
I don't think it is, and I also don't think there is anything wrong
with reusing bit 52.
>
> Adding Christian on cc, maybe he has some insight on _PAGE_UNUSED
> bit 56 and swap ptes.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-16 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-15 14:18 [PATCH v1 0/7] mm: COW fixes part 3: reliable GUP R/W FOLL_GET of anonymous pages David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 14:18 ` [PATCH v1 1/7] mm/swap: remember PG_anon_exclusive via a swp pte bit David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 14:18 ` [PATCH v1 2/7] mm/debug_vm_pgtable: add tests for __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 14:18 ` [PATCH v1 3/7] x86/pgtable: support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 14:18 ` [PATCH v1 4/7] arm64/pgtable: " David Hildenbrand
2022-03-16 18:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-03-17 10:04 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-17 17:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-03-18 9:59 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-18 11:33 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-03-18 14:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-21 14:38 ` Will Deacon
2022-03-21 14:39 ` Will Deacon
2022-03-21 15:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-21 17:44 ` Will Deacon
2022-03-21 18:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-03-22 9:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 14:18 ` [PATCH v1 5/7] s390/pgtable: " David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 16:21 ` Gerald Schaefer
2022-03-15 16:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 16:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 17:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 17:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-16 10:56 ` Gerald Schaefer
2022-03-16 11:06 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2022-03-16 13:01 ` Christian Borntraeger
2022-03-16 13:27 ` Gerald Schaefer
2022-03-16 14:00 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 14:18 ` [PATCH v1 6/7] powerpc/pgtable: remove _PAGE_BIT_SWAP_TYPE for book3s David Hildenbrand
2022-03-15 14:18 ` [PATCH v1 7/7] powerpc/pgtable: support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE " David Hildenbrand
2022-03-18 23:48 ` [PATCH v1 0/7] mm: COW fixes part 3: reliable GUP R/W FOLL_GET of anonymous pages Jason Gunthorpe
2022-03-19 11:17 ` David Hildenbrand
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=655640d5-3886-c4fb-6531-3148fd90e3d5@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ddutile@redhat.com \
--cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=oded.gabbay@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=pedrodemargomes@gmail.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhangliang5@huawei.com \
/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).