linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 00/11] mm/memory: optimize fork() with PTE-mapped THP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <fa9425e8-f489-48d0-9bf5-98d1b46b6d1a@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 20:33:09 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
 Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
 Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>,
 "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt
 <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
 Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/11] mm/memory: optimize fork() with PTE-mapped THP

On 23.01.24 20:15, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> Now that the rmap overhaul[1] is upstream that provides a clean interface
>> for rmap batching, let's implement PTE batching during fork when processing
>> PTE-mapped THPs.
>>
>> This series is partially based on Ryan's previous work[2] to implement
>> cont-pte support on arm64, but its a complete rewrite based on [1] to
>> optimize all architectures independent of any such PTE bits, and to
>> use the new rmap batching functions that simplify the code and prepare
>> for further rmap accounting changes.
>>
>> We collect consecutive PTEs that map consecutive pages of the same large
>> folio, making sure that the other PTE bits are compatible, and (a) adjust
>> the refcount only once per batch, (b) call rmap handling functions only
>> once per batch and (c) perform batch PTE setting/updates.
>>
>> While this series should be beneficial for adding cont-pte support on
>> ARM64[2], it's one of the requirements for maintaining a total mapcount[3]
>> for large folios with minimal added overhead and further changes[4] that
>> build up on top of the total mapcount.
> 
> I'm currently rebasing my contpte work onto this series, and have hit a problem.
> I need to expose the "size" of a pte (pte_size()) and skip forward to the start
> of the next (cont)pte every time through the folio_pte_batch() loop. But
> pte_next_pfn() only allows advancing by 1 pfn; I need to advance by nr pfns:
> 
> 
> static inline int folio_pte_batch(struct folio *folio, unsigned long addr,
> 		pte_t *start_ptep, pte_t pte, int max_nr, bool *any_writable)
> {
> 	unsigned long folio_end_pfn = folio_pfn(folio) + folio_nr_pages(folio);
> 	const pte_t *end_ptep = start_ptep + max_nr;
> 	pte_t expected_pte = __pte_batch_clear_ignored(pte_next_pfn(pte));
> -	pte_t *ptep = start_ptep + 1;
> +	pte_t *ptep = start_ptep;
> +	int vfn, nr, i;
> 	bool writable;
> 
> 	if (any_writable)
> 		*any_writable = false;
> 
> 	VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!pte_present(pte), folio);
> 
> +	vfn = addr >> PAGE_SIZE;
> +	nr = pte_size(pte);
> +	nr = ALIGN_DOWN(vfn + nr, nr) - vfn;
> +	ptep += nr;
> +
> 	while (ptep != end_ptep) {
> +		pte = ptep_get(ptep);
> 		nr = pte_size(pte);
> 		if (any_writable)
> 			writable = !!pte_write(pte);
> 		pte = __pte_batch_clear_ignored(pte);
> 
> 		if (!pte_same(pte, expected_pte))
> 			break;
> 
> 		/*
> 		 * Stop immediately once we reached the end of the folio. In
> 		 * corner cases the next PFN might fall into a different
> 		 * folio.
> 		 */
> -		if (pte_pfn(pte) == folio_end_pfn)
> +		if (pte_pfn(pte) >= folio_end_pfn)
> 			break;
> 
> 		if (any_writable)
> 			*any_writable |= writable;
> 
> -		expected_pte = pte_next_pfn(expected_pte);
> -		ptep++;
> +		for (i = 0; i < nr; i++)
> +			expected_pte = pte_next_pfn(expected_pte);
> +		ptep += nr;
> 	}
> 
> 	return ptep - start_ptep;
> }
> 
> 
> So I'm wondering if instead of enabling pte_next_pfn() for all the arches,
> perhaps its actually better to expose pte_pgprot() for all the arches. Then we
> can be much more flexible about generating ptes with pfn_pte(pfn, pgprot).
> 
> What do you think?

The pte_pgprot() stuff is just nasty IMHO.

Likely it's best to simply convert pte_next_pfn() to something like 
pte_advance_pfns(). The we could just have

#define pte_next_pfn(pte) pte_advance_pfns(pte, 1)

That should be fairly easy to do on top (based on PFN_PTE_SHIFT). And 
only 3 archs (x86-64, arm64, and powerpc) need slight care to replace a 
hardcoded "1" by an integer we pass in.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb