Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] mm/migrate: remove range invalidation in migrate_vma_pages() | From | Ralph Campbell <> | Date | Fri, 31 Jul 2020 12:31:23 -0700 |
| |
On 7/31/20 12:15 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 03:04:07PM -0700, Ralph Campbell wrote: >> >> On 7/28/20 12:19 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 03:30:04PM -0700, Ralph Campbell wrote: >>>> When migrating the special zero page, migrate_vma_pages() calls >>>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() before replacing the zero page >>>> PFN in the CPU page tables. This is unnecessary since the range was >>>> invalidated in migrate_vma_setup() and the page table entry is checked >>>> to be sure it hasn't changed between migrate_vma_setup() and >>>> migrate_vma_pages(). Therefore, remove the redundant invalidation. >>> >>> I don't follow this logic, the purpose of the invalidation is also to >>> clear out anything that may be mirroring this VA, and "the page hasn't >>> changed" doesn't seem to rule out that case? >>> >>> I'm also not sure I follow where the zero page came from? >> >> The zero page comes from an anonymous private VMA that is read-only >> and the user level CPU process tries to read the page data (or any >> other read page fault). >> >>> Jason >>> >> >> The overall migration process is: >> >> mmap_read_lock() >> >> migrate_vma_setup() >> // invalidates range, locks/isolates pages, puts migration entry in page table >> >> <driver allocates destination pages and copies source to dest> >> >> migrate_vma_pages() >> // moves source struct page info to destination struct page info. >> // clears migration flag for pages that can't be migrated. >> >> <driver updates device page tables for pages still migrating, rollback pages not migrating> >> >> migrate_vma_finalize() >> // replaces migration page table entry with destination page PFN. >> >> mmap_read_unlock() >> >> Since the address range is invalidated in the migrate_vma_setup() stage, >> and the page is isolated from the LRU cache, locked, unmapped, and the page table >> holds a migration entry (so the page can't be faulted and the CPU page table set >> valid again), and there are no extra page references (pins), the page >> "should not be modified". > > That is the physical page though, it doesn't prove nobody else is > reading the PTE. > >> For pte_none()/is_zero_pfn() entries, migrate_vma_setup() leaves the >> pte_none()/is_zero_pfn() entry in place but does still call >> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() for the whole range being migrated. > > Ok.. > >> In the migrate_vma_pages() step, the pte page table is locked and the >> pte entry checked to be sure it is still pte_none/is_zero_pfn(). If not, >> the new page isn't inserted. If it is still none/zero, the new device private >> struct page is inserted into the page table, replacing the pte_none()/is_zero_pfn() >> page table entry. The secondary MMUs were already invalidated in the migrate_vma_setup() >> step and a pte_none() or zero page can't be modified so the only invalidation needed >> is the CPU TLB(s) for clearing the special zero page PTE entry. > > No, the secondary MMU was invalidated but the invalidation start/end > range was exited. That means a secondary MMU is immeidately able to > reload the zero page into its MMU cache. > > When this code replaces the PTE that has a zero page it also has to > invalidate again so that secondary MMU's are guaranteed to pick up the > new PTE value. > > So, I still don't understand how this is safe? > > Jason
Oops, you are right of course. I was only thinking of the device doing the migration and forgetting about a second device faulting on the same page. You can drop patch from the series.
| |