[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201120200133.GH917484@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 16:01:33 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.ibm.com>,
Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] mm: support THP migration to device private memory
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 03:38:42PM -0800, Ralph Campbell wrote:
> MEMORY_DEVICE_GENERIC:
> Struct pages are created in dev_dax_probe() and represent non-volatile memory.
> The device can be mmap()'ed which calls dax_mmap() which sets
> vma->vm_flags | VM_HUGEPAGE.
> A CPU page fault will result in a PTE, PMD, or PUD sized page
> (but not compound) to be inserted by vmf_insert_mixed() which will call either
> insert_pfn() or insert_page().
> Neither insert_pfn() nor insert_page() increments the page reference
> count.
But why was this done? It seems very strange to put a pfn with a
struct page into a VMA and then deliberately not take the refcount for
the duration of that pfn being in the VMA?
What prevents memunmap_pages() from progressing while VMAs still point
at the memory?
> I think just leaving the page reference count at one is better than trying
> to use the mmu_interval_notifier or changing vmf_insert_mixed() and
> invalidations of pfn_t_devmap(pfn) to adjust the page reference count.
Why so? The entire point of getting struct page's for this stuff was
to be able to follow the struct page flow. I never did learn a reason
why there is devmap stuff all over the place in the page table code...
> MEMORY_DEVICE_FS_DAX:
> Struct pages are created in pmem_attach_disk() and virtio_fs_setup_dax() with
> an initial reference count of one.
> The problem I see is that there are 3 states that are important:
> a) memory is free and not allocated to any file (page_ref_count() == 0).
> b) memory is allocated to a file and in the page cache (page_ref_count() == 1).
> c) some gup() or I/O has a reference even after calling unmap_mapping_pages()
> (page_ref_count() > 1). ext4_break_layouts() basically waits until the
> page_ref_count() == 1 with put_page() calling wake_up_var(&page->_refcount)
> to wake up ext4_break_layouts().
> The current code doesn't seem to distinguish (a) and (b). If we want to use
> the 0->1 reference count to signal (c), then the page cache would have hold
> entries with a page_ref_count() == 0 which doesn't match the general page cache
> assumptions.
This explanation feels confusing. If *anything* has a reference on the
page it cannot be recycled. I would have guess the logic is to remove
it from the page cache then wait for a 0 reference??
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists