linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: migration: fix migration of huge PMD shared pages

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4a95a24f-534f-0938-f358-2a410817a412@oracle.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Aug 2018 09:48:16 -0700
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kbuild-all@...org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: migration: fix migration of huge PMD shared
 pages

On 08/22/2018 05:28 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 21-08-18 18:10:42, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> [...]
>> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
>> index eb477809a5c0..8cf853a4b093 100644
>> --- a/mm/rmap.c
>> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
>> @@ -1362,11 +1362,21 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	/*
>> -	 * We have to assume the worse case ie pmd for invalidation. Note that
>> -	 * the page can not be free in this function as call of try_to_unmap()
>> -	 * must hold a reference on the page.
>> +	 * For THP, we have to assume the worse case ie pmd for invalidation.
>> +	 * For hugetlb, it could be much worse if we need to do pud
>> +	 * invalidation in the case of pmd sharing.
>> +	 *
>> +	 * Note that the page can not be free in this function as call of
>> +	 * try_to_unmap() must hold a reference on the page.
>>  	 */
>>  	end = min(vma->vm_end, start + (PAGE_SIZE << compound_order(page)));
>> +	if (PageHuge(page)) {
>> +		/*
>> +		 * If sharing is possible, start and end will be adjusted
>> +		 * accordingly.
>> +		 */
>> +		(void)huge_pmd_sharing_possible(vma, &start, &end);
>> +	}
>>  	mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(vma->vm_mm, start, end);
> 
> I do not get this part. Why don't we simply unconditionally invalidate
> the whole huge page range?

In this routine, we are only unmapping a single page.  The existing code
is limiting the invalidate range to that page size: 4K or 2M.  With shared
PMDs, we have the possibility of unmapping a PUD_SIZE area: 1G.  I don't
think we want to unconditionally invalidate 1G.  Is that what you are asking?

I do not know how often PMD sharing is exercised.  It certainly is used by
DBs for large shared areas.  I suspect it is less frequent than hugtlb pages
in general, and certainly less frequent than THP or base pages.

>>  
>>  	while (page_vma_mapped_walk(&pvmw)) {
>> @@ -1409,6 +1419,32 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>  		subpage = page - page_to_pfn(page) + pte_pfn(*pvmw.pte);
>>  		address = pvmw.address;
>>  
>> +		if (PageHuge(page)) {
>> +			if (huge_pmd_unshare(mm, &address, pvmw.pte)) {
> 
> huge_pmd_unshare is documented to require a pte lock. Where do we take
> it?

It is somewhat hidden, but we are in the loop:

	while (page_vma_mapped_walk(&pvmw)) {

The routine page_vma_mapped_walk will acquire the lock, and it correctly
checks for huge pages and uses huge_pte_lockptr().

page_vma_mapped_walk_done() will release the lock.
-- 
Mike Kravetz