[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPTztWb0ZMHB74=KGxqRpTejDXNVJZ+Y9LGH1KEaPy_cnUmABA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:55:55 -0700
From: Frank van der Linden <fvdl@...gle.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>, Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Nanyong Sun <sunnanyong@...wei.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, anshuman.khandual@....com,
wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] A Solution to Re-enable hugetlb vmemmap optimize
I had an offline discussion with Yu on this, and he pointed out
something I hadn't realized: the x86 cmpxchg instruction always
produces a write cycle, even if it doesn't modify the data - it just
writes back the original data in that case.
So, get_page_unless_zero will always produce a fault on RO mapped page
structures on x86.
Maybe this was obvious to other people, but I didn't see it explicitly
mentioned, so I figured I'd add the datapoint.
- Frank
On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 1:30 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> >> Additionally, we also should alter RO permission of those 7 tail pages
> >> to RW to avoid panic().
> >
> > We can use RCU, which IMO is a better choice, as the following:
> >
> > get_page_unless_zero()
> > {
> > int rc = false;
> >
> > rcu_read_lock();
> >
> > if (page_is_fake_head(page) || !page_ref_count(page)) {
> > smp_mb(); // implied by atomic_add_unless()
> > goto unlock;
> > }
> >
> > rc = page_ref_add_unless();
> >
> > unlock:
> > rcu_read_unlock();
> >
> > return rc;
> > }
> >
> > And on the HVO/de-HOV sides:
> >
> > folio_ref_unfreeze();
> > synchronize_rcu();
> > HVO/de-HVO;
> >
> > I think this is a lot better than making tail page metadata RW because:
> > 1. it helps debug, IMO, a lot;
> > 2. I don't think HVO is the only one that needs this.
> >
> > David (we missed you in today's THP meeting),
>
> Sorry, I had a private meeting conflict :)
>
> >
> > Please correct me if I'm wrong -- I think virtio-mem also suffers from
> > the same problem when freeing offlined struct page, since I wasn't
> > able to find anything that would prevent a **speculative** struct page
> > walker from trying to access struct pages belonging to pages being
> > concurrently offlined.
>
> virtio-mem does currently not yet optimize fake-offlined memory like HVO
> would. So the only way we really remove "struct page" metadata is by
> actually offlining+removing a complete Linux memory block, like ordinary
> memory hotunplug would.
>
> It might be an interesting project to optimize "struct page" metadata
> consumption for fake-offlined memory chunks within an online Linux
> memory block.
>
> The biggest challenge might be interaction with memory hotplug, which
> requires all "struct page" metadata to be allocated. So that would make
> cases where virtio-mem hot-plugs a Linux memory block but keeps parts of
> it fake-offline a bit more problematic to handle .
>
> In a world with memdesc this might all be nicer to handle I think :)
>
>
> There is one possible interaction between virtio-mem and speculative
> page references: all fake-offline chunks in a Linux memory block do have
> on each page a refcount of 1 and PageOffline() set. When actually
> offlining the Linux memory block to remove it, virtio-mem will drop that
> reference during MEM_GOING_OFFLINE, such that memory offlining can
> proceed (seeing refcount==0 and PageOffline()).
>
> In virtio_mem_fake_offline_going_offline() we have:
>
> if (WARN_ON(!page_ref_dec_and_test(page)))
> dump_page(page, "fake-offline page referenced");
>
> which would trigger on a speculative reference.
>
> We never saw that trigger so far because quite a long time must have
> passed ever since a page might have been part of the page cache / page
> tables, before virtio-mem fake-offlined it (using alloc_contig_range())
> and the Linux memory block actually gets offlined.
>
> But yes, RCU (e.g., on the memory offlining path) would likely be the
> right approach to make sure GUP-fast and the pagecache will no longer
> grab this page by accident.
>
> >
> > If this is true, we might want to map a "zero struct page" rather than
> > leave a hole in vmemmap when offlining pages. And the logic on the hot
> > removal side would be similar to that of HVO.
>
> Once virtio-mem would do something like HVO, yes. Right now virtio-mem
> only removes struct-page metadata by removing/unplugging its owned Linux
> memory blocks once they are fully "logically offline".
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists