Re: [PATCH] mm,do_huge_pmd_numa_page: remove unnecessary TLB flushing code

["Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>]

Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> writes:

> On 22.07.21 02:26, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, I think you are correct. By looking into commit 7066f0f933a1
>>>> ("mm: thp: fix mmu_notifier in migrate_misplaced_transhuge_page()"),
>>>> the tlb flush and mmu notifier invalidate were needed since the old
>>>> numa fault implementation didn't change PTE to migration entry so it
>>>> may cause data corruption due to the writes from GPU secondary MMU.
>>>>
>>>> The refactor does use the generic migration code which converts PTE to
>>>> migration entry before copying data to the new page.
>>>
>>> That's my understanding as well, based on this blurb from commit 7066f0f933a1.
>>>
>>>      The standard PAGE_SIZEd migrate_misplaced_page is less accelerated and
>>>      uses the generic migrate_pages which transitions the pte from
>>>      numa/protnone to a migration entry in try_to_unmap_one() and flushes TLBs
>>>      and all mmu notifiers there before copying the page.
>>>
>>> That analysis/justification for removing the invalidate_range() call should be
>>> captured in the changelog.  Confirmation from Andrea would be a nice bonus.
>> When we flush CPU TLB for a page that may be shared with device/VM
>> TLB,
>> we will call MMU notifiers for the page to flush the device/VM TLB.
>> Right?  So when we replaced CPU TLB flushing in do_huge_pmd_numa_page()
>> with that in try_to_migrate_one(), we will replace the MMU notifiers
>> calling too.  Do you agree?
>
> Can someone write an updated commit messages that contains this information?

OK.  I will update the patch description to add MMU notifiers
description.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying