From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B04C56201 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 15:16:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 556DE2222F for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 15:16:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="trnbgVZz"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="IRDorcB6" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 556DE2222F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=7FV9VzdH1UqO/p33DdTkOp1PCLfdJFa9V3L8eXOxt5s=; b=trnbgVZzAPTwiAu9+RJkR2N0i GXCJVB+aFKOxkGyU+keN+3sq9wDULaJR0M6GmpJwxu0EUI6dXg2+cEF+NY5oGXSprHnuxnedIBx4e kIkSenuh2F+crXUrl7uYk1lCsvj0/WJXpzZv1lwGsj7WIQtFt4+9hE7K8hs9RBAA8dJ+jjn6FsjvY HJs4nAVj40yYnM0kwDcBcbfzSQYZgWYrlGO+UzCTmEgGKIfOOTfELN+Q3zawmTDVDRWEWVPx0O4PH KHTsvaRvbVGYgWT10euEw571wn4P/az/XnBuw42USOgFke2ZGZoraDTNFzVXqe366QW8lFyh0XXG7 Wsv1TAvPg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kg88L-00033d-NA; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 15:15:33 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kg88I-000327-8J for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 15:15:31 +0000 Received: from willie-the-truck (236.31.169.217.in-addr.arpa [217.169.31.236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 726E42222F; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 15:15:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605885329; bh=myF2EzCes4UVMutespd8PDoerC1yzUqdk7cGgmK3HWk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IRDorcB6ldF3sNlcORjj2k73XJBnmxxSjcSDRg1jxvIfT96O4MqbTKjmNtoGNUIrU lKbjYVfTXF+0+uDHZPITUOToP+Ct1EsDmk5iRd2om4XbZ6ZbYn7QJDJdcyFqtoCtl/ edQ6erShqwUz/0RpRBDNw+8k8ogMf5rXVAC52jms= Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 15:15:24 +0000 From: Will Deacon To: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] mm: proc: Invalidate TLB after clearing soft-dirty page state Message-ID: <20201120151523.GA6861@willie-the-truck> References: <20201120143557.6715-1-will@kernel.org> <20201120143557.6715-5-will@kernel.org> <20201120150023.GH3040@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201120150023.GH3040@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201120_101530_410847_433963F6 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 21.16 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Yu Zhao , Anshuman Khandual , Catalin Marinas , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Minchan Kim , kernel-team@android.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 04:00:23PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 02:35:55PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > Since commit 0758cd830494 ("asm-generic/tlb: avoid potential double flush"), > > TLB invalidation is elided in tlb_finish_mmu() if no entries were batched > > via the tlb_remove_*() functions. Consequently, the page-table modifications > > performed by clear_refs_write() in response to a write to > > /proc//clear_refs do not perform TLB invalidation. Although this is > > fine when simply aging the ptes, in the case of clearing the "soft-dirty" > > state we can end up with entries where pte_write() is false, yet a > > writable mapping remains in the TLB. > > > > Fix this by calling tlb_remove_tlb_entry() for each entry being > > write-protected when cleating soft-dirty. > > > > > @@ -1053,6 +1054,7 @@ static inline void clear_soft_dirty(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > > ptent = pte_wrprotect(old_pte); > > ptent = pte_clear_soft_dirty(ptent); > > ptep_modify_prot_commit(vma, addr, pte, old_pte, ptent); > > + tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, pte, addr); > > } else if (is_swap_pte(ptent)) { > > ptent = pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(ptent); > > set_pte_at(vma->vm_mm, addr, pte, ptent); > > Oh! > > Yesterday when you had me look at this code; I figured the sane thing > to do was to make it look more like mprotect(). Ah, so you mean ditch the mmu_gather altogether? > Why did you chose to make it work with mmu_gather instead? I'll grant > you that it's probably the smaller patch, but I still think it's weird > to use mmu_gather here. > > Also, is tlb_remote_tlb_entry() actually correct? If you look at > __tlb_remove_tlb_entry() you'll find that Power-Hash-32 will clear the > entry, which might not be what we want here, we want to update the > entrty. Hmm, I didn't spot that, although ptep_modify_prot_start() does actually clear the pte so we could just move this up a few lines. Will > > > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel