[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4a28e8a0-2efa-8b5e-10b5-38f1fc143a98@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 14:09:41 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Donald Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] mm: support GUP-triggered unsharing via
FAULT_FLAG_UNSHARE (!hugetlb)
>> IIUC, our COW logic makes sure that a shared anonymous page that might
>> still be used by a R/O FOLL_GET cannot be modified, because any attempt
>> to modify it would result in a copy.
>
> Well, we defined FOLL_PIN to mean the intent that the caller wants to access
> not only page state (for which is enough FOLL_GET and there are some users
> - mostly inside mm - who need this) but also page data. Eventually, we even
> wanted to make FOLL_GET unavailable to broad areas of kernel (and keep it
> internal to only MM for its dirty deeds ;)) to reduce the misuse of GUP.
>
> For file pages we need this data vs no-data access distinction so that
> filesystems can detect when someone can be accessing page data although the
> page is unmapped. Practically, filesystems care most about when someone
> can be *modifying* page data (we need to make sure data is stable e.g. when
> writing back data to disk or doing data checksumming or other operations)
> so using FOLL_GET when wanting to only read page data should be OK for
> filesystems but honestly I would be reluctant to break the rule of "use
> FOLL_PIN when wanting to access page data" to keep things simple and
> reasonably easy to understand for parties such as filesystem developers or
> driver developers who all need to interact with pinned pages...
Right, from an API perspective we really want people to use FOLL_PIN.
To optimize this case in particular it would help if we would have the
FOLL flags on the unpin path. Then we could just decide internally
"well, short-term R/O FOLL_PIN can be really lightweight, we can treat
this like a FOLL_GET instead". And we would need that as well if we were
to keep different counters for R/O vs. R/W pinned.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists