| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAGsJ_4wwyFtyYgyoHpWOR=rbg23pkaMNLxJ0oMKbQjPb5oR-RQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:43:48 +1300
From: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
Cc: Chuanhua Han <chuanhuahan@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
chengming.zhou@...ux.dev, chrisl@...nel.org, david@...hat.com,
hannes@...xchg.org, kasong@...cent.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhocko@...e.com, nphamcs@...il.com,
shy828301@...il.com, steven.price@....com, surenb@...gle.com,
wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, willy@...radead.org, xiang@...nel.org,
ying.huang@...el.com, yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com,
Chuanhua Han <hanchuanhua@...o.com>, Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 5/5] mm: support large folios swapin as a whole
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 2:57 AM Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> wrote:
>
> On 14/03/2024 12:56, Chuanhua Han wrote:
> > Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> 于2024年3月13日周三 00:33写道：
> >>
> >> On 04/03/2024 08:13, Barry Song wrote:
> >>> From: Chuanhua Han <hanchuanhua@...o.com>
> >>>
> >>> On an embedded system like Android, more than half of anon memory is
> >>> actually in swap devices such as zRAM. For example, while an app is
> >>> switched to background, its most memory might be swapped-out.
> >>>
> >>> Now we have mTHP features, unfortunately, if we don't support large folios
> >>> swap-in, once those large folios are swapped-out, we immediately lose the
> >>> performance gain we can get through large folios and hardware optimization
> >>> such as CONT-PTE.
> >>>
> >>> This patch brings up mTHP swap-in support. Right now, we limit mTHP swap-in
> >>> to those contiguous swaps which were likely swapped out from mTHP as a
> >>> whole.
> >>>
> >>> Meanwhile, the current implementation only covers the SWAP_SYCHRONOUS
> >>> case. It doesn't support swapin_readahead as large folios yet since this
> >>> kind of shared memory is much less than memory mapped by single process.
> >>>
> >>> Right now, we are re-faulting large folios which are still in swapcache as a
> >>> whole, this can effectively decrease extra loops and early-exitings which we
> >>> have increased in arch_swap_restore() while supporting MTE restore for folios
> >>> rather than page. On the other hand, it can also decrease do_swap_page as
> >>> PTEs used to be set one by one even we hit a large folio in swapcache.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Chuanhua Han <hanchuanhua@...o.com>
> >>> Co-developed-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> mm/memory.c | 250 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >>> 1 file changed, 212 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> >>> index e0d34d705e07..501ede745ef3 100644
> >>> --- a/mm/memory.c
> >>> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> >>> @@ -3907,6 +3907,136 @@ static vm_fault_t handle_pte_marker(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * check a range of PTEs are completely swap entries with
> >>> + * contiguous swap offsets and the same SWAP_HAS_CACHE.
> >>> + * pte must be first one in the range
> >>> + */
> >>> +static bool is_pte_range_contig_swap(pte_t *pte, int nr_pages)
> >>> +{
> >>> + int i;
> >>> + struct swap_info_struct *si;
> >>> + swp_entry_t entry;
> >>> + unsigned type;
> >>> + pgoff_t start_offset;
> >>> + char has_cache;
> >>> +
> >>> + entry = pte_to_swp_entry(ptep_get_lockless(pte));
> >>
> >> Given you are getting entry locklessly, I expect it could change under you? So
> >> probably need to check that its a swap entry, etc. first?
> > The following non_swap_entry checks to see if it is a swap entry.
>
> No, it checks if something already known to be a "swap entry" type is actually
> describing a swap entry, or a non-swap entry (e.g. migration entry, hwpoison
> entry, etc.) Swap entries with type >= MAX_SWAPFILES don't actually describe swap:
>
> static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
> {
> return swp_type(entry) >= MAX_SWAPFILES;
> }
>
>
> So you need to do something like:
>
> pte = ptep_get_lockless(pte);
> if (pte_none(pte) || !pte_present(pte))
> return false;
Indeed, I noticed that a couple of days ago, but it turned out that it
didn't cause any issues
because the condition following 'if (swp_offset(entry) != start_offset
+ i)' cannot be true :-)
I do agree it needs a fix here. maybe by
if (!is_swap_pte(pte))
return false?
> entry = pte_to_swp_entry(pte);
> if (non_swap_entry(entry))
> return false;
> ...
>
> >>
> >>> + if (non_swap_entry(entry))
> >>> + return false;
> >>> + start_offset = swp_offset(entry);
> >>> + if (start_offset % nr_pages)
> >>> + return false;
> >>> +
> >>> + si = swp_swap_info(entry);
> >>
> >> What ensures si remains valid (i.e. swapoff can't happen)? If swapoff can race,
> >> then swap_map may have been freed when you read it below. Holding the PTL can
> >> sometimes prevent it, but I don't think you're holding that here (you're using
> >> ptep_get_lockless(). Perhaps get_swap_device()/put_swap_device() can help?
> > Thank you for your review,you are righit! this place reaally needs
> > get_swap_device()/put_swap_device().
> >>
> >>> + type = swp_type(entry);
> >>> + has_cache = si->swap_map[start_offset] & SWAP_HAS_CACHE;
> >>> + for (i = 1; i < nr_pages; i++) {
> >>> + entry = pte_to_swp_entry(ptep_get_lockless(pte + i));
> >>> + if (non_swap_entry(entry))
> >>> + return false;
> >>> + if (swp_offset(entry) != start_offset + i)
> >>> + return false;
> >>> + if (swp_type(entry) != type)
> >>> + return false;
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * while allocating a large folio and doing swap_read_folio for the
> >>> + * SWP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO path, which is the case the being faulted pte
> >>> + * doesn't have swapcache. We need to ensure all PTEs have no cache
> >>> + * as well, otherwise, we might go to swap devices while the content
> >>> + * is in swapcache
> >>> + */
> >>> + if ((si->swap_map[start_offset + i] & SWAP_HAS_CACHE) != has_cache)
> >>> + return false;
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> + return true;
> >>> +}
> >>
> >> I created swap_pte_batch() for the swap-out series [1]. I wonder if that could
> >> be extended for the SWAP_HAS_CACHE checks? Possibly not because it assumes the
> >> PTL is held, and you are lockless here. Thought it might be of interest though.
> >>
> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240311150058.1122862-3-ryan.roberts@arm.com/
> >>
> > Thanks. It's probably simily to ours, but as you said we are lockless
> > here, and we need to check has_cache.
> >>> +
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * Get a list of all the (large) orders below PMD_ORDER that are enabled
> >>> + * for this vma. Then filter out the orders that can't be allocated over
> >>> + * the faulting address and still be fully contained in the vma.
> >>> + */
> >>> +static inline unsigned long get_alloc_folio_orders(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
> >>> + unsigned long orders;
> >>> +
> >>> + orders = thp_vma_allowable_orders(vma, vma->vm_flags, false, true, true,
> >>> + BIT(PMD_ORDER) - 1);
> >>> + orders = thp_vma_suitable_orders(vma, vmf->address, orders);
> >>> + return orders;
> >>> +}
> >>> +#endif
> >>> +
> >>> +static struct folio *alloc_swap_folio(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> >>> + unsigned long orders;
> >>> + struct folio *folio;
> >>> + unsigned long addr;
> >>> + pte_t *pte;
> >>> + gfp_t gfp;
> >>> + int order;
> >>> +
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * If uffd is active for the vma we need per-page fault fidelity to
> >>> + * maintain the uffd semantics.
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (unlikely(userfaultfd_armed(vma)))
> >>> + goto fallback;
> >>> +
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * a large folio being swapped-in could be partially in
> >>> + * zswap and partially in swap devices, zswap doesn't
> >>> + * support large folios yet, we might get corrupted
> >>> + * zero-filled data by reading all subpages from swap
> >>> + * devices while some of them are actually in zswap
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (is_zswap_enabled())
> >>> + goto fallback;
> >>> +
> >>> + orders = get_alloc_folio_orders(vmf);
> >>> + if (!orders)
> >>> + goto fallback;
> >>> +
> >>> + pte = pte_offset_map(vmf->pmd, vmf->address & PMD_MASK);
> >>
> >> Could also briefly take PTL here, then is_pte_range_contig_swap() could be
> >> merged with an enhanced swap_pte_batch()?
> > Yes, it's easy to use a lock here, but I'm wondering if it's
> > necessary, because when we actually set pte in do_swap_page, we'll
> > hold PTL to check if the pte changes.
> >>
> >>> + if (unlikely(!pte))
> >>> + goto fallback;
> >>> +
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * For do_swap_page, find the highest order where the aligned range is
> >>> + * completely swap entries with contiguous swap offsets.
> >>> + */
> >>> + order = highest_order(orders);
> >>> + while (orders) {
> >>> + addr = ALIGN_DOWN(vmf->address, PAGE_SIZE << order);
> >>> + if (is_pte_range_contig_swap(pte + pte_index(addr), 1 << order))
> >>> + break;
> >>> + order = next_order(&orders, order);
> >>> + }
> >>
> >> So in the common case, swap-in will pull in the same size of folio as was
> >> swapped-out. Is that definitely the right policy for all folio sizes? Certainly
> >> it makes sense for "small" large folios (e.g. up to 64K IMHO). But I'm not sure
> >> it makes sense for 2M THP; As the size increases the chances of actually needing
> >> all of the folio reduces so chances are we are wasting IO. There are similar
> >> arguments for CoW, where we currently copy 1 page per fault - it probably makes
> >> sense to copy the whole folio up to a certain size.
> > For 2M THP, IO overhead may not necessarily be large? :)
> > 1.If 2M THP are continuously stored in the swap device, the IO
> > overhead may not be very large (such as submitting bio with one
> > bio_vec at a time).
> > 2.If the process really needs this 2M data, one page-fault may perform
> > much better than multiple.
> > 3.For swap devices like zram,using 2M THP might also improve
> > decompression efficiency.
> >
> > On the other hand, if the process only needs a small part of the 2M
> > data (such as only frequent use of 4K page, the rest of the data is
> > never accessed), This is indeed give a lark to catch a kite! :(
>
> Yes indeed. It's not always clear-cut what the best thing to do is. It would be
> good to hear from others on this.
>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ryan
> >>
> >>> +
> >>> + pte_unmap(pte);
> >>> +
> >>> + /* Try allocating the highest of the remaining orders. */
> >>> + gfp = vma_thp_gfp_mask(vma);
> >>> + while (orders) {
> >>> + addr = ALIGN_DOWN(vmf->address, PAGE_SIZE << order);
> >>> + folio = vma_alloc_folio(gfp, order, vma, addr, true);
> >>> + if (folio)
> >>> + return folio;
> >>> + order = next_order(&orders, order);
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> +fallback:
> >>> +#endif
> >>> + return vma_alloc_folio(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE, 0, vma, vmf->address, false);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +
> >>> /*
> >>> * We enter with non-exclusive mmap_lock (to exclude vma changes,
> >>> * but allow concurrent faults), and pte mapped but not yet locked.
> >>> @@ -3928,6 +4058,9 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> pte_t pte;
> >>> vm_fault_t ret = 0;
> >>> void *shadow = NULL;
> >>> + int nr_pages = 1;
> >>> + unsigned long start_address;
> >>> + pte_t *start_pte;
> >>>
> >>> if (!pte_unmap_same(vmf))
> >>> goto out;
> >>> @@ -3991,35 +4124,41 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> if (!folio) {
> >>> if (data_race(si->flags & SWP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO) &&
> >>> __swap_count(entry) == 1) {
> >>> - /*
> >>> - * Prevent parallel swapin from proceeding with
> >>> - * the cache flag. Otherwise, another thread may
> >>> - * finish swapin first, free the entry, and swapout
> >>> - * reusing the same entry. It's undetectable as
> >>> - * pte_same() returns true due to entry reuse.
> >>> - */
> >>> - if (swapcache_prepare(entry)) {
> >>> - /* Relax a bit to prevent rapid repeated page faults */
> >>> - schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
> >>> - goto out;
> >>> - }
> >>> - need_clear_cache = true;
> >>> -
> >>> /* skip swapcache */
> >>> - folio = vma_alloc_folio(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE, 0,
> >>> - vma, vmf->address, false);
> >>> + folio = alloc_swap_folio(vmf);
> >>> page = &folio->page;
> >>> if (folio) {
> >>> __folio_set_locked(folio);
> >>> __folio_set_swapbacked(folio);
> >>>
> >>> + if (folio_test_large(folio)) {
> >>> + nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> >>> + entry.val = ALIGN_DOWN(entry.val, nr_pages);
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * Prevent parallel swapin from proceeding with
> >>> + * the cache flag. Otherwise, another thread may
> >>> + * finish swapin first, free the entry, and swapout
> >>> + * reusing the same entry. It's undetectable as
> >>> + * pte_same() returns true due to entry reuse.
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (swapcache_prepare_nr(entry, nr_pages)) {
> >>> + /* Relax a bit to prevent rapid repeated page faults */
> >>> + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
> >>> + goto out;
> >>> + }
> >>> + need_clear_cache = true;
> >>> +
> >>> if (mem_cgroup_swapin_charge_folio(folio,
> >>> vma->vm_mm, GFP_KERNEL,
> >>> entry)) {
> >>> ret = VM_FAULT_OOM;
> >>> goto out_page;
> >>> }
> >>> - mem_cgroup_swapin_uncharge_swap(entry);
> >>> +
> >>> + for (swp_entry_t e = entry; e.val < entry.val + nr_pages; e.val++)
> >>> + mem_cgroup_swapin_uncharge_swap(e);
> >>>
> >>> shadow = get_shadow_from_swap_cache(entry);
> >>> if (shadow)
> >>> @@ -4118,6 +4257,42 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> */
> >>> vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
> >>> &vmf->ptl);
> >>> +
> >>> + start_address = vmf->address;
> >>> + start_pte = vmf->pte;
> >>> + if (start_pte && folio_test_large(folio)) {
> >>> + unsigned long nr = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> >>> + unsigned long addr = ALIGN_DOWN(vmf->address, nr * PAGE_SIZE);
> >>> + pte_t *aligned_pte = vmf->pte - (vmf->address - addr) / PAGE_SIZE;
> >>> +
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * case 1: we are allocating large_folio, try to map it as a whole
> >>> + * iff the swap entries are still entirely mapped;
> >>> + * case 2: we hit a large folio in swapcache, and all swap entries
> >>> + * are still entirely mapped, try to map a large folio as a whole.
> >>> + * otherwise, map only the faulting page within the large folio
> >>> + * which is swapcache
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (!is_pte_range_contig_swap(aligned_pte, nr)) {
> >>> + if (nr_pages > 1) /* ptes have changed for case 1 */
> >>> + goto out_nomap;
> >>> + goto check_pte;
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> + start_address = addr;
> >>> + start_pte = aligned_pte;
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * the below has been done before swap_read_folio()
> >>> + * for case 1
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (unlikely(folio == swapcache)) {
> >>> + nr_pages = nr;
> >>> + entry.val = ALIGN_DOWN(entry.val, nr_pages);
> >>> + page = &folio->page;
> >>> + }
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> +check_pte:
> >>> if (unlikely(!vmf->pte || !pte_same(ptep_get(vmf->pte), vmf->orig_pte)))
> >>> goto out_nomap;
> >>>
> >>> @@ -4185,12 +4360,14 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> * We're already holding a reference on the page but haven't mapped it
> >>> * yet.
> >>> */
> >>> - swap_free(entry);
> >>> + swap_nr_free(entry, nr_pages);
> >>> if (should_try_to_free_swap(folio, vma, vmf->flags))
> >>> folio_free_swap(folio);
> >>>
> >>> - inc_mm_counter(vma->vm_mm, MM_ANONPAGES);
> >>> - dec_mm_counter(vma->vm_mm, MM_SWAPENTS);
> >>> + folio_ref_add(folio, nr_pages - 1);
> >>> + add_mm_counter(vma->vm_mm, MM_ANONPAGES, nr_pages);
> >>> + add_mm_counter(vma->vm_mm, MM_SWAPENTS, -nr_pages);
> >>> +
> >>> pte = mk_pte(page, vma->vm_page_prot);
> >>>
> >>> /*
> >>> @@ -4200,14 +4377,14 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> * exclusivity.
> >>> */
> >>> if (!folio_test_ksm(folio) &&
> >>> - (exclusive || folio_ref_count(folio) == 1)) {
> >>> + (exclusive || folio_ref_count(folio) == nr_pages)) {
> >>> if (vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) {
> >>> pte = maybe_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(pte), vma);
> >>> vmf->flags &= ~FAULT_FLAG_WRITE;
> >>> }
> >>> rmap_flags |= RMAP_EXCLUSIVE;
> >>> }
> >>> - flush_icache_page(vma, page);
> >>> + flush_icache_pages(vma, page, nr_pages);
> >>> if (pte_swp_soft_dirty(vmf->orig_pte))
> >>> pte = pte_mksoft_dirty(pte);
> >>> if (pte_swp_uffd_wp(vmf->orig_pte))
> >>> @@ -4216,17 +4393,19 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>>
> >>> /* ksm created a completely new copy */
> >>> if (unlikely(folio != swapcache && swapcache)) {
> >>> - folio_add_new_anon_rmap(folio, vma, vmf->address);
> >>> + folio_add_new_anon_rmap(folio, vma, start_address);
> >>> folio_add_lru_vma(folio, vma);
> >>> + } else if (!folio_test_anon(folio)) {
> >>> + folio_add_new_anon_rmap(folio, vma, start_address);
> >>> } else {
> >>> - folio_add_anon_rmap_pte(folio, page, vma, vmf->address,
> >>> + folio_add_anon_rmap_ptes(folio, page, nr_pages, vma, start_address,
> >>> rmap_flags);
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> VM_BUG_ON(!folio_test_anon(folio) ||
> >>> (pte_write(pte) && !PageAnonExclusive(page)));
> >>> - set_pte_at(vma->vm_mm, vmf->address, vmf->pte, pte);
> >>> - arch_do_swap_page(vma->vm_mm, vma, vmf->address, pte, vmf->orig_pte);
> >>> + set_ptes(vma->vm_mm, start_address, start_pte, pte, nr_pages);
> >>> + arch_do_swap_page(vma->vm_mm, vma, start_address, pte, vmf->orig_pte);
> >>>
> >>> folio_unlock(folio);
> >>> if (folio != swapcache && swapcache) {
> >>> @@ -4243,6 +4422,9 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> if (vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) {
> >>> + if (nr_pages > 1)
> >>> + vmf->orig_pte = ptep_get(vmf->pte);
> >>> +
> >>> ret |= do_wp_page(vmf);
> >>> if (ret & VM_FAULT_ERROR)
> >>> ret &= VM_FAULT_ERROR;
> >>> @@ -4250,14 +4432,14 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> /* No need to invalidate - it was non-present before */
> >>> - update_mmu_cache_range(vmf, vma, vmf->address, vmf->pte, 1);
> >>> + update_mmu_cache_range(vmf, vma, start_address, start_pte, nr_pages);
> >>> unlock:
> >>> if (vmf->pte)
> >>> pte_unmap_unlock(vmf->pte, vmf->ptl);
> >>> out:
> >>> /* Clear the swap cache pin for direct swapin after PTL unlock */
> >>> if (need_clear_cache)
> >>> - swapcache_clear(si, entry);
> >>> + swapcache_clear_nr(si, entry, nr_pages);
> >>> if (si)
> >>> put_swap_device(si);
> >>> return ret;
> >>> @@ -4273,7 +4455,7 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> folio_put(swapcache);
> >>> }
> >>> if (need_clear_cache)
> >>> - swapcache_clear(si, entry);
> >>> + swapcache_clear_nr(si, entry, nr_pages);
> >>> if (si)
> >>> put_swap_device(si);
> >>> return ret;
> >>> @@ -4309,15 +4491,7 @@ static struct folio *alloc_anon_folio(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >>> if (unlikely(userfaultfd_armed(vma)))
> >>> goto fallback;
> >>>
> >>> - /*
> >>> - * Get a list of all the (large) orders below PMD_ORDER that are enabled
> >>> - * for this vma. Then filter out the orders that can't be allocated over
> >>> - * the faulting address and still be fully contained in the vma.
> >>> - */
> >>> - orders = thp_vma_allowable_orders(vma, vma->vm_flags, false, true, true,
> >>> - BIT(PMD_ORDER) - 1);
> >>> - orders = thp_vma_suitable_orders(vma, vmf->address, orders);
> >>> -
> >>> + orders = get_alloc_folio_orders(vmf);
> >>> if (!orders)
> >>> goto fallback;
> >>>
Thanks
Barry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists