Re: [PATCH v11 4/7] fs/proc/task_mmu: Implement IOCTL to get and optionally clear info about PTEs

Muhammad Usama Anjum
2023-03-20T06:09:40Z

On 3/17/23 7:15 PM, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 at 13:44, Muhammad Usama Anjum
> <usama.anjum@collabora.com> wrote:
>> On 3/17/23 2:28 AM, Michał Mirosław wrote:
>>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 at 18:53, Muhammad Usama Anjum
>>> <usama.anjum@collabora.com> wrote:
>>>> On 3/13/23 9:02 PM, Michał Mirosław wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 14:58, Muhammad Usama Anjum
>>>>> <usama.anjum@collabora.com> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
>>> [...]
>>>>>> +static int pagemap_scan_output(bool wt, bool file, bool pres, bool swap,
>>> [...]
>>>>> The `cur->len` test seems redundant: is it possible to have
>>>>> `cur->start == addr` in that case (I guess it would have to get
>>>>> `n_pages == 0` in an earlier invocation)?
>>>> No, both wouldn't work. cur->len == 0 means that it has only garbage. It is
>>>> essential to check the validity from cur->len before performing other
>>>> checks. Also cur->start can never be equal to addr as we are walking over
>>>> page addressing in serial manner. We want to see here if the current
>>>> address matches the previous data by finding the ending address of last
>>>> stored data (cur->start + cur->len * PAGE_SIZE).
>>>
>>> If cur->len == 0, then it doesn't matter if it gets merged or not - it
>>> can be filtered out during the flush (see below).
>>> [...]
>>>>>> + } else if ((!p->vec_index) ||
>>>>>> + ((p->vec_index + 1) < p->vec_len)) {
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you explain this test? Why not just `p->vec_index < p->vec_len`? Or better:
>>>>>
>>>>> if (vec_index >= p->vec_len)
>>>>> return -ENOSPC;
>>>>
>>>> No, it'll not work. Lets leave it as it is. :)
>>>>
>>>> It has gotten somewhat complex, but I don't have any other way to make it
>>>> simpler which works. First note the following points:
>>>> 1) We walk over 512 page or 1 thp at a time to not over allocate memory in
>>>> kernel (p->vec).
>>>> 2) We also want to merge the consecutive pages with the same flags into one
>>>> struct page_region. p->vec of current walk may merge with next walk. So we
>>>> cannot write to user memory until we find the results of the next walk.
>>>>
>>>> So most recent data is put into p->cur. When non-intersecting or mergeable
>>>> data is found, we move p->cur to p->vec[p->index] inside the page walk.
>>>> After the page walk, p->vec[0 to p->index] is moved to arg->vec. After all
>>>> the walks are over. We move the p->cur to arg->vec. It completes the data
>>>> transfer to user buffer.
>>> [...]
>>>> I'm so sorry that it has gotten this much complex. It was way simpler when
>>>> we were walking over all the memory in one go. But then we needed an
>>>> unbounded memory from the kernel which we don't want.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I've gone through and hopefully understood the code. I'm not sure this
>>> needs to be so complicated: when traversing a single PMD you can
>>> always copy p->cur to p->vec[p->vec_index++] because you can have at
>>> most pages_per_PMD non-merges (in the worst case the last page always
>>> is left in p->cur and whole p->vec is used). After each PMD p->vec
>>> needs a flush if p->vec_index > 0, skipping the dummy entry at front
>>> (len == 0; if present). (This is mostly how it is implemented now, but
>>> I propose to remove the "overflow" check and do the starting guard
>>> removal only every PMD.)
>> Sorry, unable to understand where to remove the guard?
>
> Instead of checking for it in pagemap_scan_output() for each page you
> can skip it in do_pagemap_cmd() when doing the flush.
No, this cannot be done because in do_pagemap_cmd() we don't know that we
have space for new pages in the output buffer or not because the next page
may be aggregated to already present data.

>
>>> BTW#2, I think the ENOSPC return in pagemap_scan_output() should
>>> happen later - only if the pages would match and that caused the count
>>> to exceed the limit. For THP n_pages should be truncated to the limit
>>> (and ENOSPC returned right away) only after the pages were verified to
>>> match.
>> We have 2 counters here:
>> * the p->max_pages optionally can be set to find out only N pages of
>> interest. So p->found_pages is counting this. We need to return early if
>> the page limit is complete.
>> * the p->vec_index keeps track of output buffer array size
>
> I think I get how the limits are supposed to work, but I also think
> the implementation is not optimal. An example (assuming max_pages = 1
> and vec_len = 1):
> - a matching page has been found
> - a second - non-matching - is tried but results in immediate -ENOSPC.
> -> In this case I'd expect the early return to happen just after the
> first page is found so that non
> A similar problem occurs for hugepage: when the limit is hit (we found
>> = max_pages, n_pages is possibly truncated), but the scan continues
> until next page / PMD.
I'll try to check if I can optimize it. It seems like I should be able to
update this pretty easily by returning a negative status/error which
signifies that we have found the max_pages. Now just abort in sane way.

>
> [...]
>>>>>> + if (!arg->required_mask && !arg->anyof_mask &&
>>>>>> + !arg->excluded_mask)
>>>>>> + return false;
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there an assumption in the code that those checks are needed? I'd
>>>>> expect that no selection criteria makes a valid page set?
>>>> In my view, selection criterion must be specified for the ioctl to work. If
>>>> there is no criterio, user should go and read pagemap file directly. So the
>>>> assumption is that at least one selection criterion must be specified.
>>>
>>> Yes. I'm not sure we need to prevent multiple ways of doing the same
>>> thing. But doesn't pagemap reading lack the range aggregation feature?
>> Yeah, correct. But note that we are supporting only selective 4 flags in
>> this ioctl, not all pagemap flags. So it is useful for only those users who
>> depend only on these 4 flags. Out pagemap_ioctl interface is not so much
>> generic that we can cater anyone. Its interface is specific and we are
>> adding only those cases which are of our interest. So if someone wants
>> range aggregation from pagemap_ioctl, he'll need to add that flag in the
>> IOCTL first. When IOCTL support is added, he can specify the selection
>> criterion etc.
>
> The available flag set is not a problem. An example usecase: dumping
> the memory state for debugging: ioctl(return_mask=ALL) returns a
> conveniently compact vector of ranges of pages that are actually used
> by the process (not only having reserved the virtual space). This is
> actually something that helps dumping processes with using tools like
> AddressSanitizer that create huge sparse mappings.
I don't know, we are adding more and more use cases as people are noticing
it. I've not thought about this use case. So I need more understanding
about it:
How should I identify "which pages are used"? Does use mean present and
swapped both? We we want to find present or swapped pages in other words
!pte_none pages and return in compact form, it can already be done by
ioctl(anyod_mask=PRESET | SWAPPED, return_mask=ALL).

>
> Best Regards
> Michał Mirosław

--
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum