[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <mafs03496w0kk.fsf@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2025 19:21:31 +0200
From: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
pratyush@...nel.org, jasonmiu@...gle.com, graf@...zon.com,
changyuanl@...gle.com, dmatlack@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
corbet@....net, rdunlap@...radead.org, ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com,
kanie@...ux.alibaba.com, ojeda@...nel.org, aliceryhl@...gle.com,
masahiroy@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org,
yoann.congal@...le.fr, mmaurer@...gle.com, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
chenridong@...wei.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mark.rutland@....com,
jannh@...gle.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, david@...hat.com, joel.granados@...nel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, anna.schumaker@...cle.com, song@...nel.org,
zhangguopeng@...inos.cn, linux@...ssschuh.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, rafael@...nel.org, dakr@...nel.org,
bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org, cw00.choi@...sung.com,
myungjoo.ham@...sung.com, yesanishhere@...il.com,
Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com, quic_zijuhu@...cinc.com,
aleksander.lobakin@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, leon@...nel.org, lukas@...ner.de,
bhelgaas@...gle.com, wagi@...nel.org, djeffery@...hat.com,
stuart.w.hayes@...il.com, lennart@...ttering.net, brauner@...nel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
saeedm@...dia.com, ajayachandra@...dia.com, parav@...dia.com,
leonro@...dia.com, witu@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 29/30] luo: allow preserving memfd
Hi Pasha,
On Mon, Sep 01 2025, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 4:23 PM Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 01:20:19PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>> > On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 01:44:35AM +0000, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
>> >
>> > > + /*
>> > > + * Most of the space should be taken by preserved folios. So take its
>> > > + * size, plus a page for other properties.
>> > > + */
>> > > + fdt = memfd_luo_create_fdt(PAGE_ALIGN(preserved_size) + PAGE_SIZE);
>> > > + if (!fdt) {
>> > > + err = -ENOMEM;
>> > > + goto err_unpin;
>> > > + }
>> >
>> > This doesn't seem to have any versioning scheme, it really should..
>> >
>> > > + err = fdt_property_placeholder(fdt, "folios", preserved_size,
>> > > + (void **)&preserved_folios);
>> > > + if (err) {
>> > > + pr_err("Failed to reserve folios property in FDT: %s\n",
>> > > + fdt_strerror(err));
>> > > + err = -ENOMEM;
>> > > + goto err_free_fdt;
>> > > + }
>> >
>> > Yuk.
>> >
>> > This really wants some luo helper
>> >
>> > 'luo alloc array'
>> > 'luo restore array'
>> > 'luo free array'
>>
>> We can just add kho_{preserve,restore}_vmalloc(). I've drafted it here:
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rppt/linux.git/log/?h=kho/vmalloc/v1
>
> The patch looks okay to me, but it doesn't support holes in vmap
> areas. While that is likely acceptable for vmalloc, it could be a
> problem if we want to preserve memfd with holes and using vmap
> preservation as a method, which would require a different approach.
> Still, this would help with preserving memfd.
I agree. I think we should do it the other way round. Build a sparse
array first, and then use that to build vmap preservation. Our emails
seem to have crossed, but see my reply to Mike [0] that describes my
idea a bit more, along with WIP code.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/mafs0ldmyw1hp.fsf@kernel.org/
>
> However, I wonder if we should add a separate preservation library on
> top of the kho and not as part of kho (or at least keep them in a
> separate file from core logic). This would allow us to preserve more
> advanced data structures such as this and define preservation version
> control, similar to Jason's store_object/restore_object proposal.
This is how I have done it in my code: created a separate file called
kho_array.c. If we have enough such data structures, we can probably
move it under kernel/liveupdate/lib/.
As for the store_object/restore_object proposal: see an alternate idea
at [1].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/mafs0h5xmw12a.fsf@kernel.org/
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists