[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8735dvd4g3.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 09:49:48 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] mm: Remember young/dirty bit for page migrations
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com> writes:
> On Aug 15, 2022, at 12:18 PM, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 10:32:48AM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
>>> Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 06:00:58PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/mm/migrate_device.c b/mm/migrate_device.c
>>>>> index 27fb37d65476..699f821b8443 100644
>>>>> --- a/mm/migrate_device.c
>>>>> +++ b/mm/migrate_device.c
>>>>> @@ -221,6 +221,10 @@ static int migrate_vma_collect_pmd(pmd_t *pmdp,
>>>>> else
>>>>> entry = make_readable_migration_entry(
>>>>> page_to_pfn(page));
>>>>> + if (pte_young(pte))
>>>>> + entry = make_migration_entry_young(entry);
>>>>> + if (pte_dirty(pte))
>>>>> + entry = make_migration_entry_dirty(entry);
>>>>> swp_pte = swp_entry_to_pte(entry);
>>>>> if (pte_present(pte)) {
>>>>> if (pte_soft_dirty(pte))
>>>>
>>>> This change needs to be wrapped with pte_present() at least..
>>>>
>>>> I also just noticed that this change probably won't help anyway because:
>>>>
>>>> (1) When ram->device, the pte will finally be replaced with a device
>>>> private entry, and device private entry does not yet support A/D, it
>>>> means A/D will be dropped again,
>>>>
>>>> (2) When device->ram, we are missing information on either A/D bits, or
>>>> even if device private entries start to suport A/D, it's still not
>>>> clear whether we should take device read/write into considerations
>>>> too on the page A/D bits to be accurate.
>>>>
>>>> I think I'll probably keep the code there for completeness, but I think it
>>>> won't really help much until more things are done.
>>>
>>> It appears that there are more issues. Between "pte = *ptep" and pte
>>> clear, CPU may set A/D bit in PTE, so we may need to update pte when
>>> clearing PTE.
>>
>> Agreed, I didn't see it a huge problem with current code, but it should be
>> better in that way.
>>
>>> And I don't find the TLB is flushed in some cases after PTE is cleared.
>>
>> I think it's okay to not flush tlb if pte not present. But maybe you're
>> talking about something else?
>
> I think Huang refers to situation in which the PTE is cleared, still not
> flushed, and then A/D is being set by the hardware.
No. The situation in my mind is PTE with A/D set is cleared, not
flushed. Then a parallel mprotect or munmap may cause race conditions.
As Alistair pointed out in another thread [1], there is TLB flushing
after PTL unlocked. But I think we need to flush TLB before unlock.
This has been fixed in Alistair's latest version [2].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87r11gvrx6.fsf@nvdebian.thelocal/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6e77914685ede036c419fa65b6adc27f25a6c3e9.1660635033.git-series.apopple@nvidia.com/
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
Powered by blists - more mailing lists