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=-6.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 12A97C47087 for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 12:56:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A70D2613C9 for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 12:56:09 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A70D2613C9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 335046B0036; Fri, 28 May 2021 08:56:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 2E4DD6B006E; Fri, 28 May 2021 08:56:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id ED94D6B0070; Fri, 28 May 2021 08:56:08 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0025.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.25]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8DB36B0036 for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 08:56:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 480AF8249980 for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 12:56:08 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78190637616.20.0F81EBF Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by imf30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A915E0004CE for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 12:56:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1622206567; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rfNmkt8/NcUZNR0qW24m0wKOWRCBjF/g8IalMns/rZM=; b=A/QDGOlXKG5tnbxUvvpIxh51PcZhKerQ7LKp33bZAsaU74amslMSoPk5WIAUAvXc+oZD/P uzPVJ+ys1GLkpxCHxTWEWwJWOURrxsPCg/frrrV+LwDaG/BjUw5hO+Pvbv7O4JXso7dIdq 7OVSShAhtw8ud1bLWhpyMhQwdzr46pY= Received: from mail-qk1-f200.google.com (mail-qk1-f200.google.com [209.85.222.200]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-193-t9qU06ivPbybZlgTiQsb9Q-1; Fri, 28 May 2021 08:56:05 -0400 X-MC-Unique: t9qU06ivPbybZlgTiQsb9Q-1 Received: by mail-qk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id s68-20020a372c470000b0290305f75a7cecso2969532qkh.8 for ; Fri, 28 May 2021 05:56:05 -0700 (PDT) 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=rfNmkt8/NcUZNR0qW24m0wKOWRCBjF/g8IalMns/rZM=; b=SAeinUpzNwI0EXSezzUFXT+K4TZ5gUjVEJ80VlgMDFzxa+9LW+Ytk6Jgl8W9UuwQpj nQBv66ct52VUzGs5r9TaFW0v6aHFwtRA9rRkotB/8SzNavH8lwtNENIm9ubhScsGTsI5 gqgD1SCWTUGQuwcPH3IHLTjBxX86I2oRG3OgL4qxSpAnWo8u5Up/NJZ1SNRPV0R+nsTB K+a3lu+AeSB0+8ib5v6DU05vETsrpX10S9yDarUPnRHW7A3WF0oD4dnWouAxA1rCowDm SaaMcdKX4u2v2bGnvLLn0+W/2C5EFaqgHs8d5xZp5ukHVNcX6T7AWsYI17/TCqLbvTee HjQw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ZdSBhWm/cTodfTljuYvyjYmkuqgfMvxn3kz4GZxOClRWypFTS yG9zWCZFbkYLz9dzqxmRkHRPZZ0INhu05NX/Nf5U3ckuCDj0PF15540kklYAbWDmsHF9PPfm4Vk BoTsjtMoZGs0= X-Received: by 2002:a37:ef06:: with SMTP id j6mr3853657qkk.25.1622206564982; Fri, 28 May 2021 05:56:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy1VUv+BI1TcALoEnUxRq6kApiF70FXFYkLNF2YXAc4YQvBKvV7VbhNBzthoBGO153G8YXZMg== X-Received: by 2002:a37:ef06:: with SMTP id j6mr3853622qkk.25.1622206564661; Fri, 28 May 2021 05:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from t490s (bras-base-toroon474qw-grc-72-184-145-4-219.dsl.bell.ca. [184.145.4.219]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x9sm3311843qtf.76.2021.05.28.05.56.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 28 May 2021 05:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 08:56:02 -0400 From: Peter Xu To: Alistair Popple Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Axel Rasmussen , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton , Miaohe Lin , Mike Rapoport , Jerome Glisse , Andrea Arcangeli , Nadav Amit , Mike Kravetz , Jason Gunthorpe , Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/27] mm/userfaultfd: Introduce special pte for unmapped file-backed mem Message-ID: References: <20210527201927.29586-1-peterx@redhat.com> <20210527201927.29586-5-peterx@redhat.com> <4422901.rTkcW5k3cD@nvdebian> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4422901.rTkcW5k3cD@nvdebian> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Authentication-Results: imf30.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b="A/QDGOlX"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=none (imf30.hostedemail.com: domain of peterx@redhat.com has no SPF policy when checking 216.205.24.124) smtp.mailfrom=peterx@redhat.com X-Stat-Signature: jkgpnzphw39xj5w6ygdrtbeb4fsd9ha7 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5A915E0004CE X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-HE-Tag: 1622206561-969494 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 06:32:52PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote: > On Friday, 28 May 2021 6:19:04 AM AEST Peter Xu wrote: > > This patch introduces a very special swap-like pte for file-backed memories. > > > > Currently it's only defined for x86_64 only, but as long as any arch that > > can properly define the UFFD_WP_SWP_PTE_SPECIAL value as requested, it > > should conceptually work too. > > > > We will use this special pte to arm the ptes that got either unmapped or > > swapped out for a file-backed region that was previously wr-protected. This > > special pte could trigger a page fault just like swap entries, and as long > > as the page fault will satisfy pte_none()==false && pte_present()==false. > > > > Then we can revive the special pte into a normal pte backed by the page > > cache. > > > > This idea is greatly inspired by Hugh and Andrea in the discussion, which is > > referenced in the links below. > > > > The other idea (from Hugh) is that we use swp_type==1 and swp_offset=0 as > > the special pte. The current solution (as pointed out by Andrea) is > > slightly preferred in that we don't even need swp_entry_t knowledge at all > > in trapping these accesses. Meanwhile, we also reuse _PAGE_SWP_UFFD_WP > > from the anonymous swp entries. > > So to confirm my understanding the reason you use this special swap pte > instead of a new swp_type is that you only need the fault and have no extra > information that needs storing in the pte? Yes. > > Personally I think it might be better to define a new swp_type for this rather > than introducing a new arch-specific concept. The concept should not be arch-specific, it's the pte that's arch-specific. > swp_type entries are portable so wouldn't need extra arch-specific bits > defined. And as I understand things not all architectures (eg. ARM) have > spare bits in their swap entry encoding anyway so would have to reserve a bit > specifically for this which would be less efficient than using a swp_type. It looks a trade-off to me: I think it's fine to use swap type in my series, as you said it's portable, but it will also waste the swap address space for the arch when the arch enables it. The format of the special pte to trigger the fault in this series should be only a small portion of the code change. The main logic should still be the same - we just replace this pte with that one. IMHO it also means the format can be changed in the future, it's just that I don't know whether it's wise to take over a new swap type from start. > > Anyway it seems I missed the initial discussion so don't have a strong opinion > here, mainly just wanted to check my understanding of what's required and how > these special entries work. Thanks for mentioning this and join the discussion. I don't know ARM enough so good to know we may have issue on finding the bits. Actually before finding this bit for file-backed uffd-wp specifically, we need to firstly find a bit in the normal pte for ARM too anyways (see _PAGE_UFFD_WP). If there's no strong reason to switch to a new swap type, I'd tend to leave all these to the future when we enable them on ARM. -- Peter Xu