From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill@shutemov.name,
ak@linux.intel.com, mhocko@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net,
jack@suse.cz, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
benh@kernel.crashing.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
hpa@zytor.com, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
kemi.wang@intel.com, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
npiggin@gmail.com, bsingharora@gmail.com,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 04/24] mm: Prepare for FAULT_FLAG_SPECULATIVE
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:27:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <361fa6e7-3c17-e1b8-8046-af72c4459613@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803251426120.80485@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On 25/03/2018 23:50, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>
>> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>>
>> When speculating faults (without holding mmap_sem) we need to validate
>> that the vma against which we loaded pages is still valid when we're
>> ready to install the new PTE.
>>
>> Therefore, replace the pte_offset_map_lock() calls that (re)take the
>> PTL with pte_map_lock() which can fail in case we find the VMA changed
>> since we started the fault.
>>
>
> Based on how its used, I would have suspected this to be named
> pte_map_trylock().
>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
>>
>> [Port to 4.12 kernel]
>> [Remove the comment about the fault_env structure which has been
>> implemented as the vm_fault structure in the kernel]
>> [move pte_map_lock()'s definition upper in the file]
>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/mm.h | 1 +
>> mm/memory.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
>> index 4d02524a7998..2f3e98edc94a 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
>> @@ -300,6 +300,7 @@ extern pgprot_t protection_map[16];
>> #define FAULT_FLAG_USER 0x40 /* The fault originated in userspace */
>> #define FAULT_FLAG_REMOTE 0x80 /* faulting for non current tsk/mm */
>> #define FAULT_FLAG_INSTRUCTION 0x100 /* The fault was during an instruction fetch */
>> +#define FAULT_FLAG_SPECULATIVE 0x200 /* Speculative fault, not holding mmap_sem */
>>
>> #define FAULT_FLAG_TRACE \
>> { FAULT_FLAG_WRITE, "WRITE" }, \
>
> I think FAULT_FLAG_SPECULATIVE should be introduced in the patch that
> actually uses it.
I think you're right, I'll move down this define in the series.
>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
>> index e0ae4999c824..8ac241b9f370 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory.c
>> @@ -2288,6 +2288,13 @@ int apply_to_page_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(apply_to_page_range);
>>
>> +static bool pte_map_lock(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>
> inline?
Agreed.
>> +{
>> + vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vmf->vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd,
>> + vmf->address, &vmf->ptl);
>> + return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> /*
>> * handle_pte_fault chooses page fault handler according to an entry which was
>> * read non-atomically. Before making any commitment, on those architectures
>> @@ -2477,6 +2484,7 @@ static int wp_page_copy(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> const unsigned long mmun_start = vmf->address & PAGE_MASK;
>> const unsigned long mmun_end = mmun_start + PAGE_SIZE;
>> struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
>> + int ret = VM_FAULT_OOM;
>>
>> if (unlikely(anon_vma_prepare(vma)))
>> goto oom;
>> @@ -2504,7 +2512,11 @@ static int wp_page_copy(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> /*
>> * Re-check the pte - we dropped the lock
>> */
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address, &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf)) {
>> + mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(new_page, memcg, false);
>> + ret = VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + goto oom_free_new;
>> + }
>
> Ugh, but we aren't oom here, so maybe rename oom_free_new so that it makes
> sense for return values other than VM_FAULT_OOM?
You're right, now this label name is not correct, I'll rename it to
"out_free_new" and rename also the label "oom" to "out" since it is generic too
now.
>> if (likely(pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte))) {
>> if (old_page) {
>> if (!PageAnon(old_page)) {
>> @@ -2596,7 +2608,7 @@ static int wp_page_copy(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> oom:
>> if (old_page)
>> put_page(old_page);
>> - return VM_FAULT_OOM;
>> + return ret;
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> @@ -2617,8 +2629,8 @@ static int wp_page_copy(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> int finish_mkwrite_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> {
>> WARN_ON_ONCE(!(vmf->vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED));
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vmf->vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
>> - &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf))
>> + return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> /*
>> * We might have raced with another page fault while we released the
>> * pte_offset_map_lock.
>> @@ -2736,8 +2748,11 @@ static int do_wp_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> get_page(vmf->page);
>> pte_unmap_unlock(vmf->pte, vmf->ptl);
>> lock_page(vmf->page);
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd,
>> - vmf->address, &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf)) {
>> + unlock_page(vmf->page);
>> + put_page(vmf->page);
>> + return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + }
>> if (!pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte)) {
>> unlock_page(vmf->page);
>> pte_unmap_unlock(vmf->pte, vmf->ptl);
>> @@ -2947,8 +2962,10 @@ int do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> * Back out if somebody else faulted in this pte
>> * while we released the pte lock.
>> */
>
> Comment needs updating, pte_same() isn't the only reason to bail out here.
I'll update it to :
/*
* Back out if the VMA has changed in our back during
* a speculative page fault or if somebody else
* faulted in this pte while we released the pte lock.
*/
>
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd,
>> - vmf->address, &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf)) {
>> + delayacct_clear_flag(DELAYACCT_PF_SWAPIN);
>> + return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + }
>> if (likely(pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte)))
>> ret = VM_FAULT_OOM;
>> delayacct_clear_flag(DELAYACCT_PF_SWAPIN);
>
> Not crucial, but it would be nice if this could do goto out instead,
> otherwise this is the first mid function return.
ok will do.
>
>> @@ -3003,8 +3020,11 @@ int do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> /*
>> * Back out if somebody else already faulted in this pte.
>> */
>
> Same as above.
Ok changing as above.
>
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
>> - &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf)) {
>> + ret = VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(page, memcg, false);
>> + goto out_page;
>> + }
>> if (unlikely(!pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte)))
>> goto out_nomap;
>>
>
> mem_cgroup_try_charge() is done before grabbing pte_offset_map_lock(), why
> does the out_nomap exit path do mem_cgroup_cancel_charge();
> pte_unmap_unlock()? If the pte lock can be droppde first, there's no need
> to embed the mem_cgroup_cancel_charge() here.
I think we can safely invert the call to mem_cgroup_cancel_charge() and to
pte_unmap_unlock(), and then introduce a new label and jump in if
pte_map_lock() failed.
Something like this:
@@ -3001,10 +3020,13 @@ int do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
}
/*
- * Back out if somebody else already faulted in this pte.
+ * Back out if the VMA has changed in our back during a speculative
+ * page fault or if somebody else already faulted in this pte.
*/
- vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
- &vmf->ptl);
+ if (!pte_map_lock(vmf)) {
+ ret = VM_FAULT_RETRY;
+ goto out_cancel_cgroup;
+ }
if (unlikely(!pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte)))
goto out_nomap;
@@ -3082,8 +3104,9 @@ int do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
out:
return ret;
out_nomap:
- mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(page, memcg, false);
pte_unmap_unlock(vmf->pte, vmf->ptl);
+out_cancel_cgroup:
+ mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(page, memcg, false);
out_page:
unlock_page(page);
out_release:
>> @@ -3133,8 +3153,8 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> !mm_forbids_zeropage(vma->vm_mm)) {
>> entry = pte_mkspecial(pfn_pte(my_zero_pfn(vmf->address),
>> vma->vm_page_prot));
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd,
>> - vmf->address, &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf))
>> + return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> if (!pte_none(*vmf->pte))
>> goto unlock;
>> ret = check_stable_address_space(vma->vm_mm);
>> @@ -3169,8 +3189,11 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> if (vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE)
>> entry = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(entry));
>>
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
>> - &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf)) {
>> + mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(page, memcg, false);
>> + put_page(page);
>> + return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + }
>> if (!pte_none(*vmf->pte))
>> goto release;
>>
>
> This is more spaghetti, can the exit path be fixed up so we order things
> consistently for all gotos?
I do agree, this was due to inverted calls to mem_cgroup_cancel_charge() and
pte_unmap_unlock().
This will become:
@@ -3170,14 +3193,16 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
if (vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE)
entry = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(entry));
- vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
- &vmf->ptl);
- if (!pte_none(*vmf->pte))
+ if (!pte_map_lock(vmf)) {
+ ret = VM_FAULT_RETRY;
goto release;
+ }
+ if (!pte_none(*vmf->pte))
+ goto unlock_and_release;
ret = check_stable_address_space(vma->vm_mm);
if (ret)
- goto release;
+ goto unlock_and_release;
/* Deliver the page fault to userland, check inside PT lock */
if (userfaultfd_missing(vma)) {
@@ -3199,10 +3224,12 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
unlock:
pte_unmap_unlock(vmf->pte, vmf->ptl);
return ret;
+unlock_and_release:
+ pte_unmap_unlock(vmf->pte, vmf->ptl);
release:
mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(page, memcg, false);
put_page(page);
- goto unlock;
+ return ret;
oom_free_page:
put_page(page);
oom:
Thanks,
Laurent.
>
>> @@ -3294,8 +3317,9 @@ static int pte_alloc_one_map(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> * pte_none() under vmf->ptl protection when we return to
>> * alloc_set_pte().
>> */
>> - vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
>> - &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (!pte_map_lock(vmf))
>> + return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> +
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-28 10:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 98+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-13 17:59 [PATCH v9 00/24] Speculative page faults Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 01/24] mm: Introduce CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT Laurent Dufour
2018-03-25 21:50 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 7:49 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-28 10:16 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 11:15 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-28 21:18 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 02/24] x86/mm: Define CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 03/24] powerpc/mm: " Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 05/24] mm: Introduce pte_spinlock for FAULT_FLAG_SPECULATIVE Laurent Dufour
2018-03-25 21:50 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 8:15 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 06/24] mm: make pte_unmap_same compatible with SPF Laurent Dufour
2018-03-27 21:18 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 8:27 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-28 10:20 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 10:43 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-03 19:10 ` Jerome Glisse
2018-04-03 20:40 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-03 21:04 ` Jerome Glisse
2018-04-04 9:53 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 08/24] mm: Protect VMA modifications using VMA sequence count Laurent Dufour
2018-03-27 21:45 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 16:57 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-27 21:57 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 17:10 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 09/24] mm: protect mremap() against SPF hanlder Laurent Dufour
2018-03-27 22:12 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 18:11 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-28 21:21 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 8:24 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 10/24] mm: Protect SPF handler against anon_vma changes Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 11/24] mm: Cache some VMA fields in the vm_fault structure Laurent Dufour
2018-04-02 22:24 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 15:48 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 12/24] mm/migrate: Pass vm_fault pointer to migrate_misplaced_page() Laurent Dufour
2018-04-02 23:00 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 13/24] mm: Introduce __lru_cache_add_active_or_unevictable Laurent Dufour
2018-04-02 23:11 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 14/24] mm: Introduce __maybe_mkwrite() Laurent Dufour
2018-04-02 23:12 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 15:56 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 15/24] mm: Introduce __vm_normal_page() Laurent Dufour
2018-04-02 23:18 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 16:04 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-03 19:39 ` Jerome Glisse
2018-04-03 20:45 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 16:26 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-04 21:59 ` Jerome Glisse
2018-04-05 12:53 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 16/24] mm: Introduce __page_add_new_anon_rmap() Laurent Dufour
2018-04-02 23:57 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-10 16:30 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 17/24] mm: Protect mm_rb tree with a rwlock Laurent Dufour
2018-03-14 8:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-14 16:25 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-16 10:23 ` [mm] b33ddf50eb: INFO:trying_to_register_non-static_key kernel test robot
2018-03-16 16:38 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-03 0:11 ` [PATCH v9 17/24] mm: Protect mm_rb tree with a rwlock David Rientjes
2018-04-06 14:23 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-10 16:20 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 18/24] mm: Provide speculative fault infrastructure Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 19/24] mm: Adding speculative page fault failure trace events Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 20/24] perf: Add a speculative page fault sw event Laurent Dufour
2018-03-26 21:43 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 21/24] perf tools: Add support for the SPF perf event Laurent Dufour
2018-03-26 21:44 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-27 3:49 ` Andi Kleen
2018-04-10 6:47 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-12 13:44 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 22/24] mm: Speculative page fault handler return VMA Laurent Dufour
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 23/24] x86/mm: Add speculative pagefault handling Laurent Dufour
2018-03-26 21:41 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-13 17:59 ` [PATCH v9 24/24] powerpc/mm: Add speculative page fault Laurent Dufour
2018-03-26 21:39 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-14 13:11 ` [PATCH v9 00/24] Speculative page faults Michal Hocko
2018-03-14 13:33 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-13 13:34 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-22 1:21 ` Ganesh Mahendran
2018-03-29 12:49 ` Laurent Dufour
[not found] ` <1520963994-28477-5-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2018-03-25 21:50 ` [PATCH v9 04/24] mm: Prepare for FAULT_FLAG_SPECULATIVE David Rientjes
2018-03-28 10:27 ` Laurent Dufour [this message]
2018-04-03 21:57 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 9:23 ` Laurent Dufour
[not found] ` <1520963994-28477-8-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2018-03-17 7:51 ` [mm] b1f0502d04: INFO:trying_to_register_non-static_key kernel test robot
2018-03-21 12:21 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-25 22:10 ` David Rientjes
2018-03-28 13:30 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-04 0:48 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 1:03 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-04 10:28 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-04 10:19 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-04 21:53 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-05 16:55 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-03-27 21:30 ` [PATCH v9 07/24] mm: VMA sequence count David Rientjes
2018-03-28 17:58 ` Laurent Dufour
2018-04-03 20:37 ` [PATCH v9 00/24] Speculative page faults Jerome Glisse
2018-04-04 7:59 ` Laurent Dufour
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=361fa6e7-3c17-e1b8-8046-af72c4459613@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kemi.wang@intel.com \
--cc=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.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).