From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org>,
<bskeggs@redhat.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: rcampbell@nvidia.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
hch@infradead.org, jgg@nvidia.com
Subject: [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 18:18:27 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210226071832.31547-4-apopple@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210226071832.31547-1-apopple@nvidia.com>
The behaviour of try_to_unmap_one() is difficult to follow because it
performs different operations based on a fairly large set of flags used
in different combinations.
TTU_MUNLOCK is one such flag. However it is exclusively used by
try_to_munlock() which specifies no other flags. Therefore rather than
overload try_to_unmap_one() with unrelated behaviour split this out into
it's own function and remove the flag.
Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
---
Given the comments on not needing to hold mmap_lock it was not 100% clear
to me if it is safe to check vma->vma_flags & VM_LOCKED and if re-checking
under the ptl was significant. I left the extra check in case it was, but
it seems one of the checks is redunant as either the first check is racey
or the second check is unneccsary.
---
include/linux/rmap.h | 1 -
mm/rmap.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/rmap.h b/include/linux/rmap.h
index 70085ca1a3fc..7f1ee411bd7b 100644
--- a/include/linux/rmap.h
+++ b/include/linux/rmap.h
@@ -87,7 +87,6 @@ struct anon_vma_chain {
enum ttu_flags {
TTU_MIGRATION = 0x1, /* migration mode */
- TTU_MUNLOCK = 0x2, /* munlock mode */
TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD = 0x4, /* split huge PMD if any */
TTU_IGNORE_MLOCK = 0x8, /* ignore mlock */
diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
index ef9ef2694c58..850eecdd866a 100644
--- a/mm/rmap.c
+++ b/mm/rmap.c
@@ -1391,10 +1391,6 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
struct mmu_notifier_range range;
enum ttu_flags flags = (enum ttu_flags)(long)arg;
- /* munlock has nothing to gain from examining un-locked vmas */
- if ((flags & TTU_MUNLOCK) && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED))
- return true;
-
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MIGRATION) && (flags & TTU_MIGRATION) &&
is_zone_device_page(page) && !is_device_private_page(page))
return true;
@@ -1455,8 +1451,6 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
page_vma_mapped_walk_done(&pvmw);
break;
}
- if (flags & TTU_MUNLOCK)
- continue;
}
/* Unexpected PMD-mapped THP? */
@@ -1775,6 +1769,44 @@ static int page_not_mapped(struct page *page)
return !page_mapped(page);
};
+static bool try_to_munlock_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+ unsigned long address, void *arg)
+{
+ struct page_vma_mapped_walk pvmw = {
+ .page = page,
+ .vma = vma,
+ .address = address,
+ };
+ bool ret = true;
+
+ /* munlock has nothing to gain from examining un-locked vmas */
+ if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED))
+ return true;
+
+ while (page_vma_mapped_walk(&pvmw)) {
+ /*
+ * If the page is mlock()d, we cannot swap it out.
+ * If it's recently referenced (perhaps page_referenced
+ * skipped over this mm) then we should reactivate it.
+ */
+ if (vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED) {
+ /* PTE-mapped THP are never mlocked */
+ if (!PageTransCompound(page)) {
+ /*
+ * Holding pte lock, we do *not* need
+ * mmap_lock here
+ */
+ mlock_vma_page(page);
+ }
+ ret = false;
+ page_vma_mapped_walk_done(&pvmw);
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
/**
* try_to_munlock - try to munlock a page
* @page: the page to be munlocked
@@ -1787,8 +1819,7 @@ static int page_not_mapped(struct page *page)
void try_to_munlock(struct page *page)
{
struct rmap_walk_control rwc = {
- .rmap_one = try_to_unmap_one,
- .arg = (void *)TTU_MUNLOCK,
+ .rmap_one = try_to_munlock_one,
.done = page_not_mapped,
.anon_lock = page_lock_anon_vma_read,
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
Nouveau mailing list
Nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-26 7:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-26 7:18 [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 0/8] Add support for SVM atomics in Nouveau Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 1/8] mm: Remove special swap entry functions Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 15:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-02 8:52 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 12:02 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-01 17:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 0:21 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 2/8] mm/swapops: Rework swap entry manipulation code Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 16:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-01 17:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple [this message]
2021-02-26 16:01 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-01 16:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-04 4:27 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 4/8] mm/rmap: Split migration into its own function Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 16:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-02 22:08 ` Zi Yan
2021-03-04 23:54 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access Alistair Popple
2021-03-01 17:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 22:55 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-02 0:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 8:57 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 12:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-04 5:20 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 6/8] mm: Selftests for exclusive device memory Alistair Popple
2021-03-01 17:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 18:07 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 23:14 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-02 9:12 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 7/8] nouveau/svm: Refactor nouveau_range_fault Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access 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=20210226071832.31547-4-apopple@nvidia.com \
--to=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bskeggs@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jgg@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=rcampbell@nvidia.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).