All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, airlied@redhat.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, arnd@arndb.de, daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch,
	david@redhat.com, dongwon.kim@intel.com, hch@infradead.org,
	hughd@google.com, jgg@nvidia.com, junxiao.chang@intel.com,
	kraxel@redhat.com, osalvador@suse.de, peterx@redhat.com,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, vivek.kasireddy@intel.com,
	willy@infradead.org
Subject: Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] mm/gup: avoid an unnecessary allocation call for" failed to apply to 6.11-stable tree
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2024 13:19:09 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b79ed291-ad60-4be7-a2c2-19fedfde74c7@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2024111754-stamina-flyer-1e05@gregkh>

On 11/17/24 12:33 PM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> 
> The patch below does not apply to the 6.11-stable tree.
> If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
> 
> To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
> 
> git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-6.11.y
> git checkout FETCH_HEAD
> git cherry-pick -x 94efde1d15399f5c88e576923db9bcd422d217f2
> # <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
> git commit -s
> git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2024111754-stamina-flyer-1e05@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 6.11.y' HEAD^..
> 

It seems that the last hunk didn't apply because it was just too far away,
as far as I can tell. I've manually applied it, resulting in the same diffs
as the original, and did a quick smoke test (boot and ran mm tests).

Here's the updated version for 6.11.y:

From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2024 13:08:00 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] mm/gup: avoid an unnecessary allocation call for
  FOLL_LONGTERM cases
X-NVConfidentiality: public
Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>

commit 53ba78de064b ("mm/gup: introduce
check_and_migrate_movable_folios()") created a new constraint on the
pin_user_pages*() API family: a potentially large internal allocation must
now occur, for FOLL_LONGTERM cases.

A user-visible consequence has now appeared: user space can no longer pin
more than 2GB of memory anymore on x86_64.  That's because, on a 4KB
PAGE_SIZE system, when user space tries to (indirectly, via a device
driver that calls pin_user_pages()) pin 2GB, this requires an allocation
of a folio pointers array of MAX_PAGE_ORDER size, which is the limit for
kmalloc().

In addition to the directly visible effect described above, there is also
the problem of adding an unnecessary allocation.  The **pages array
argument has already been allocated, and there is no need for a redundant
**folios array allocation in this case.

Fix this by avoiding the new allocation entirely.  This is done by
referring to either the original page[i] within **pages, or to the
associated folio.  Thanks to David Hildenbrand for suggesting this
approach and for providing the initial implementation (which I've tested
and adjusted slightly) as well.

[jhubbard@nvidia.com]: tweaked the patch to apply to linux-stable/6.11.y
[jhubbard@nvidia.com: whitespace tweak, per David]
   Link: 
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/131cf9c8-ebc0-4cbb-b722-22fa8527bf3c@nvidia.com
[jhubbard@nvidia.com: bypass pofs_get_folio(), per Oscar]
   Link: 
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/c1587c7f-9155-45be-bd62-1e36c0dd6923@nvidia.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241105032944.141488-2-jhubbard@nvidia.com
Fixes: 53ba78de064b ("mm/gup: introduce check_and_migrate_movable_folios()")
Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Dongwon Kim <dongwon.kim@intel.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Junxiao Chang <junxiao.chang@intel.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
  mm/gup.c | 114 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
  1 file changed, 77 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
index 947881ff5e8f..fd3d7900c24b 100644
--- a/mm/gup.c
+++ b/mm/gup.c
@@ -2282,20 +2282,57 @@ struct page *get_dump_page(unsigned long addr)
  #endif /* CONFIG_ELF_CORE */

  #ifdef CONFIG_MIGRATION
+
+/*
+ * An array of either pages or folios ("pofs"). Although it may seem 
tempting to
+ * avoid this complication, by simply interpreting a list of folios as 
a list of
+ * pages, that approach won't work in the longer term, because 
eventually the
+ * layouts of struct page and struct folio will become completely 
different.
+ * Furthermore, this pof approach avoids excessive page_folio() calls.
+ */
+struct pages_or_folios {
+	union {
+		struct page **pages;
+		struct folio **folios;
+		void **entries;
+	};
+	bool has_folios;
+	long nr_entries;
+};
+
+static struct folio *pofs_get_folio(struct pages_or_folios *pofs, long i)
+{
+	if (pofs->has_folios)
+		return pofs->folios[i];
+	return page_folio(pofs->pages[i]);
+}
+
+static void pofs_clear_entry(struct pages_or_folios *pofs, long i)
+{
+	pofs->entries[i] = NULL;
+}
+
+static void pofs_unpin(struct pages_or_folios *pofs)
+{
+	if (pofs->has_folios)
+		unpin_folios(pofs->folios, pofs->nr_entries);
+	else
+		unpin_user_pages(pofs->pages, pofs->nr_entries);
+}
+
  /*
   * Returns the number of collected folios. Return value is always >= 0.
   */
  static unsigned long collect_longterm_unpinnable_folios(
-					struct list_head *movable_folio_list,
-					unsigned long nr_folios,
-					struct folio **folios)
+		struct list_head *movable_folio_list,
+		struct pages_or_folios *pofs)
  {
  	unsigned long i, collected = 0;
  	struct folio *prev_folio = NULL;
  	bool drain_allow = true;

-	for (i = 0; i < nr_folios; i++) {
-		struct folio *folio = folios[i];
+	for (i = 0; i < pofs->nr_entries; i++) {
+		struct folio *folio = pofs_get_folio(pofs, i);

  		if (folio == prev_folio)
  			continue;
@@ -2336,16 +2373,15 @@ static unsigned long 
collect_longterm_unpinnable_folios(
   * Returns -EAGAIN if all folios were successfully migrated or -errno for
   * failure (or partial success).
   */
-static int migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(
-					struct list_head *movable_folio_list,
-					unsigned long nr_folios,
-					struct folio **folios)
+static int
+migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(struct list_head *movable_folio_list,
+				   struct pages_or_folios *pofs)
  {
  	int ret;
  	unsigned long i;

-	for (i = 0; i < nr_folios; i++) {
-		struct folio *folio = folios[i];
+	for (i = 0; i < pofs->nr_entries; i++) {
+		struct folio *folio = pofs_get_folio(pofs, i);

  		if (folio_is_device_coherent(folio)) {
  			/*
@@ -2353,7 +2389,7 @@ static int migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(
  			 * convert the pin on the source folio to a normal
  			 * reference.
  			 */
-			folios[i] = NULL;
+			pofs_clear_entry(pofs, i);
  			folio_get(folio);
  			gup_put_folio(folio, 1, FOLL_PIN);

@@ -2372,8 +2408,8 @@ static int migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(
  		 * calling folio_isolate_lru() which takes a reference so the
  		 * folio won't be freed if it's migrating.
  		 */
-		unpin_folio(folios[i]);
-		folios[i] = NULL;
+		unpin_folio(folio);
+		pofs_clear_entry(pofs, i);
  	}

  	if (!list_empty(movable_folio_list)) {
@@ -2396,12 +2432,26 @@ static int migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(
  	return -EAGAIN;

  err:
-	unpin_folios(folios, nr_folios);
+	pofs_unpin(pofs);
  	putback_movable_pages(movable_folio_list);

  	return ret;
  }

+static long
+check_and_migrate_movable_pages_or_folios(struct pages_or_folios *pofs)
+{
+	LIST_HEAD(movable_folio_list);
+	unsigned long collected;
+
+	collected = collect_longterm_unpinnable_folios(&movable_folio_list,
+						       pofs);
+	if (!collected)
+		return 0;
+
+	return migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(&movable_folio_list, pofs);
+}
+
  /*
   * Check whether all folios are *allowed* to be pinned indefinitely 
(longterm).
   * Rather confusingly, all folios in the range are required to be 
pinned via
@@ -2421,16 +2471,13 @@ static int migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(
  static long check_and_migrate_movable_folios(unsigned long nr_folios,
  					     struct folio **folios)
  {
-	unsigned long collected;
-	LIST_HEAD(movable_folio_list);
+	struct pages_or_folios pofs = {
+		.folios = folios,
+		.has_folios = true,
+		.nr_entries = nr_folios,
+	};

-	collected = collect_longterm_unpinnable_folios(&movable_folio_list,
-						       nr_folios, folios);
-	if (!collected)
-		return 0;
-
-	return migrate_longterm_unpinnable_folios(&movable_folio_list,
-						  nr_folios, folios);
+	return check_and_migrate_movable_pages_or_folios(&pofs);
  }

  /*
@@ -2442,20 +2489,13 @@ static long 
check_and_migrate_movable_folios(unsigned long nr_folios,
  static long check_and_migrate_movable_pages(unsigned long nr_pages,
  					    struct page **pages)
  {
-	struct folio **folios;
-	long i, ret;
+	struct pages_or_folios pofs = {
+		.pages = pages,
+		.has_folios = false,
+		.nr_entries = nr_pages,
+	};

-	folios = kmalloc_array(nr_pages, sizeof(*folios), GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!folios)
-		return -ENOMEM;
-
-	for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++)
-		folios[i] = page_folio(pages[i]);
-
-	ret = check_and_migrate_movable_folios(nr_pages, folios);
-
-	kfree(folios);
-	return ret;
+	return check_and_migrate_movable_pages_or_folios(&pofs);
  }
  #else
  static long check_and_migrate_movable_pages(unsigned long nr_pages,
-- 
2.47.0



  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-17 21:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-17 20:33 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] mm/gup: avoid an unnecessary allocation call for" failed to apply to 6.11-stable tree gregkh
2024-11-17 21:19 ` John Hubbard [this message]
2024-11-17 21:25   ` Greg KH
2024-11-17 21:27     ` John Hubbard
2024-11-17 21:38       ` John Hubbard
2024-11-17 21:48         ` Greg KH

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=b79ed291-ad60-4be7-a2c2-19fedfde74c7@nvidia.com \
    --to=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=airlied@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=dongwon.kim@intel.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=junxiao.chang@intel.com \
    --cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vivek.kasireddy@intel.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.