[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0a99aa24-599c-cc60-b23b-b77887af3702@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 16:53:37 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc: "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
"J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
"Maciej S . Szmigiero" <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>, luto@...nel.org,
jun.nakajima@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
aarcange@...hat.com, ddutile@...hat.com, dhildenb@...hat.com,
Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>, mhocko@...e.com,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>, wei.w.wang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/8] mm/memfd: Introduce userspace inaccessible memfd
On 26.09.22 16:48, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 12:35:34PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 23.09.22 02:58, Kirill A . Shutemov wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 11:12:46AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/magic.h b/include/uapi/linux/magic.h
>>>>> index 6325d1d0e90f..9d066be3d7e8 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/magic.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/magic.h
>>>>> @@ -101,5 +101,6 @@
>>>>> #define DMA_BUF_MAGIC 0x444d4142 /* "DMAB" */
>>>>> #define DEVMEM_MAGIC 0x454d444d /* "DMEM" */
>>>>> #define SECRETMEM_MAGIC 0x5345434d /* "SECM" */
>>>>> +#define INACCESSIBLE_MAGIC 0x494e4143 /* "INAC" */
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +int inaccessible_get_pfn(struct file *file, pgoff_t offset, pfn_t *pfn,
>>>>> + int *order)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct inaccessible_data *data = file->f_mapping->private_data;
>>>>> + struct file *memfd = data->memfd;
>>>>> + struct page *page;
>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + ret = shmem_getpage(file_inode(memfd), offset, &page, SGP_WRITE);
>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + *pfn = page_to_pfn_t(page);
>>>>> + *order = thp_order(compound_head(page));
>>>>> + SetPageUptodate(page);
>>>>> + unlock_page(page);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inaccessible_get_pfn);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +void inaccessible_put_pfn(struct file *file, pfn_t pfn)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct page *page = pfn_t_to_page(pfn);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!page))
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + put_page(page);
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inaccessible_put_pfn);
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I missed your reply regarding get/put interface.
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20220810092532.GD862421@chaop.bj.intel.com/
>>>>
>>>> "We have a design assumption that somedays this can even support non-page
>>>> based backing stores."
>>>>
>>>> As long as there is no such user in sight (especially how to get the memfd
>>>> from even allocating such memory which will require bigger changes), I
>>>> prefer to keep it simple here and work on pages/folios. No need to
>>>> over-complicate it for now.
>>>
>>> Sean, Paolo , what is your take on this? Do you have conrete use case of
>>> pageless backend for the mechanism in sight? Maybe DAX?
>>
>> The problem I'm having with this is how to actually get such memory into the
>> memory backend (that triggers notifiers) and what the semantics are at all
>> with memory that is not managed by the buddy.
>>
>> memfd with fixed PFNs doesn't make too much sense.
>
> What do you mean by "fixed PFN". It is as fixed as struct page/folio, no?
> PFN covers more possible backends.
For DAX, you usually bypass the buddy and map /dev/mem or a devdax. In
contrast to ordinary memfd that allocates memory via the buddy. That's
the difference I see -- and I wonder how it could work.
>
>> When using DAX, what happens with the shared <->private conversion? Which
>> "type" is supposed to use dax, which not?
>>
>> In other word, I'm missing too many details on the bigger picture of how
>> this would work at all to see why it makes sense right now to prepare for
>> that.
>
> IIUC, KVM doesn't really care about pages or folios. They need PFN to
> populate SEPT. Returning page/folio would make KVM do additional steps to
> extract PFN and one more place to have a bug.
Fair enough. Smells KVM specific, though.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists