[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <64f8da81-7803-4db4-73da-a158295cbc9c@deltatee.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 13:08:31 -0600
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Don Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Minturn Dave B <dave.b.minturn@...el.com>,
Jason Ekstrand <jason@...kstrand.net>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Xiong Jianxin <jianxin.xiong@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Martin Oliveira <martin.oliveira@...eticom.com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <ckulkarnilinux@...il.com>,
Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/8] mm: introduce FOLL_PCI_P2PDMA to gate getting PCI
P2PDMA pages
On 2022-09-23 12:13, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 10:39:19AM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>> GUP Callers that expect PCI P2PDMA pages can now set FOLL_PCI_P2PDMA to
>> allow obtaining P2PDMA pages. If GUP is called without the flag and a
>> P2PDMA page is found, it will return an error.
>>
>> FOLL_PCI_P2PDMA cannot be set if FOLL_LONGTERM is set.
>
> What is causing this? It is really troublesome, I would like to fix
> it. eg I would like to have P2PDMA pages in VFIO iommu page tables and
> in RDMA MR's - both require longterm.
You had said it was required if we were relying on unmap_mapping_range()...
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210928200506.GX3544071@ziepe.ca/T/#u
> Is it just because ZONE_DEVICE was created for DAX and carried that
> revocable assumption over? Does anything in your series require
> revocable?
We still rely on unmap_mapping_range() indirectly in the unbind path.
So I expect if something takes a LONGERM mapping that would block until
whatever process holds the pin releases it. That's less than ideal and
I'm not sure what can be done about it.
>> @@ -2383,6 +2392,10 @@ static int gup_pte_range(pmd_t pmd, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>> VM_BUG_ON(!pfn_valid(pte_pfn(pte)));
>> page = pte_page(pte);
>>
>> + if (unlikely(!(flags & FOLL_PCI_P2PDMA) &&
>> + is_pci_p2pdma_page(page)))
>> + goto pte_unmap;
>> +
>> folio = try_grab_folio(page, 1, flags);
>> if (!folio)
>> goto pte_unmap;
>
> On closer look this is not in the right place, we cannot touch the
> content of *page without holding a ref, and that doesn't happen until
> until try_grab_folio() completes.
>
> It would be simpler to put this check in try_grab_folio/try_grab_page
> after the ref has been obtained. That will naturally cover all the
> places that need it.
Ok, I can make that change.
Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists