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: <61dbc0f7-632f-4179-8c59-616c9cfabaf1@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 11:25:15 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com>
Cc: 21cnbao@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, fengwei.yin@...el.com,
 libang.li@...group.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 maskray@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, minchan@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
 ryan.roberts@....com, shy828301@...il.com, sj@...nel.org,
 songmuchun@...edance.com, wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, willy@...radead.org,
 xiehuan09@...il.com, ziy@...dia.com, zokeefe@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] mm/rmap: integrate PMD-mapped folio splitting into
 pagewalk loop

On 13.06.24 11:21, Lance Yang wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 4:34 PM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 10.06.24 14:06, Lance Yang wrote:
>>> In preparation for supporting try_to_unmap_one() to unmap PMD-mapped
>>> folios, start the pagewalk first, then call split_huge_pmd_address() to
>>> split the folio.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>>> Suggested-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>>    include/linux/huge_mm.h |  6 ++++++
>>>    mm/huge_memory.c        | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>>>    mm/rmap.c               | 21 +++++++++++++++------
>>>    3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>> index 088d66a54643..4670c6ee118b 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>> @@ -415,6 +415,9 @@ static inline bool thp_migration_supported(void)
>>>        return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_THP_MIGRATION);
>>>    }
>>>
>>> +void split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
>>> +                        pmd_t *pmd, bool freeze, struct folio *folio);
>>> +
>>>    #else /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */
>>>
>>>    static inline bool folio_test_pmd_mappable(struct folio *folio)
>>> @@ -477,6 +480,9 @@ static inline void __split_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>>>                unsigned long address, bool freeze, struct folio *folio) {}
>>>    static inline void split_huge_pmd_address(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>                unsigned long address, bool freeze, struct folio *folio) {}
>>> +static inline void split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>> +                                      unsigned long address, pmd_t *pmd,
>>> +                                      bool freeze, struct folio *folio) {}
>>>
>>>    #define split_huge_pud(__vma, __pmd, __address)     \
>>>        do { } while (0)
>>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> index e6d26c2eb670..d2697cc8f9d4 100644
>>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> @@ -2581,6 +2581,27 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>>>        pmd_populate(mm, pmd, pgtable);
>>>    }
>>>
>>> +void split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
>>> +                        pmd_t *pmd, bool freeze, struct folio *folio)
>>> +{
>>> +     VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio && !folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio));
>>> +     VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED(address, HPAGE_PMD_SIZE));
>>> +     VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio && !folio_test_locked(folio));
>>> +     VM_BUG_ON(freeze && !folio);
>>
>> Curious: could we actually end up here without a folio right now? That
>> would mean, that try_to_unmap_one() would be called with folio==NULL.
> 
> try_to_unmap_one() would not be called with folio==NULL, I guess.
> 
> I just moved 'VM_BUG_ON(freeze && !folio)' from __split_huge_pmd() to here,
> and now __split_huge_pmd() will call split_huge_pmd_locked().

Right, on that path we could likely get !folio.

> 
>>
>>> +
>>> +     /*
>>> +      * When the caller requests to set up a migration entry, we
>>> +      * require a folio to check the PMD against. Otherwise, there
>>> +      * is a risk of replacing the wrong folio.
>>> +      */
>>> +     if (pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) || pmd_devmap(*pmd) ||
>>> +         is_pmd_migration_entry(*pmd)) {
>>> +             if (folio && folio != pmd_folio(*pmd))
>>> +                     return;
>>> +             __split_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pmd, address, freeze);
>>> +     }
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>    void __split_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>>>                unsigned long address, bool freeze, struct folio *folio)
>>>    {
>>> @@ -2592,26 +2613,7 @@ void __split_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>>>                                (address & HPAGE_PMD_MASK) + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);
>>>        mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(&range);
>>>        ptl = pmd_lock(vma->vm_mm, pmd);
>>> -
>>> -     /*
>>> -      * If caller asks to setup a migration entry, we need a folio to check
>>> -      * pmd against. Otherwise we can end up replacing wrong folio.
>>> -      */
>>> -     VM_BUG_ON(freeze && !folio);
>>> -     VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio && !folio_test_locked(folio));
>>> -
>>> -     if (pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) || pmd_devmap(*pmd) ||
>>> -         is_pmd_migration_entry(*pmd)) {
>>> -             /*
>>> -              * It's safe to call pmd_page when folio is set because it's
>>> -              * guaranteed that pmd is present.
>>> -              */
>>> -             if (folio && folio != pmd_folio(*pmd))
>>> -                     goto out;
>>> -             __split_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pmd, range.start, freeze);
>>> -     }
>>> -
>>> -out:
>>> +     split_huge_pmd_locked(vma, range.start, pmd, freeze, folio);
>>>        spin_unlock(ptl);
>>>        mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(&range);
>>>    }
>>> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
>>> index ddffa30c79fb..b77f88695588 100644
>>> --- a/mm/rmap.c
>>> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
>>> @@ -1640,9 +1640,6 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>        if (flags & TTU_SYNC)
>>>                pvmw.flags = PVMW_SYNC;
>>>
>>> -     if (flags & TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD)
>>> -             split_huge_pmd_address(vma, address, false, folio);
>>> -
>>>        /*
>>>         * For THP, we have to assume the worse case ie pmd for invalidation.
>>>         * For hugetlb, it could be much worse if we need to do pud
>>> @@ -1668,9 +1665,6 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>        mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(&range);
>>>
>>>        while (page_vma_mapped_walk(&pvmw)) {
>>> -             /* Unexpected PMD-mapped THP? */
>>> -             VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(!pvmw.pte, folio);
>>> -
>>>                /*
>>>                 * If the folio is in an mlock()d vma, we must not swap it out.
>>>                 */
>>> @@ -1682,6 +1676,21 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>                        goto walk_done_err;
>>>                }
>>>
>>> +             if (!pvmw.pte && (flags & TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD)) {
>>> +                     /*
>>> +                      * We temporarily have to drop the PTL and start once
>>> +                      * again from that now-PTE-mapped page table.
>>> +                      */
>>> +                     split_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pvmw.address, pvmw.pmd,
>>> +                                           false, folio);
>>> +                     flags &= ~TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD;
>>> +                     page_vma_mapped_walk_restart(&pvmw);
>>
>> If, for some reason, split_huge_pmd_locked() would fail, we would keep
>> looping and never hit the VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO() below. Maybe we'd want to
>> let split_huge_pmd_locked() return whether splitting succeeded, and
>> handle that case differently?
> 
> Hmm... after calling split_huge_pmd_locked(), we also do
> "flags &= ~TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD", preventing re-entry into this block,
> then triggering the VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO() below if split_huge_pmd_locked()
> fails, IIUC.
> 
> What do you think?

Missed that, you are right.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ