From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: kevin.tian@intel.com, shuah@kernel.org,
joao.m.martins@oracle.com, steven.sistare@oracle.com,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH rc 1/4] iommufd/selftest: Fix iommufd_dirty_tracking with large hugepage sizes
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 08:59:48 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250617115948.GV1174925@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aFDMoMX8eL7azoUL@nvidia.com>
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 07:02:08PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 01:25:01PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 15, 2025 at 10:02:03PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > FIXTURE_TEARDOWN(iommufd_dirty_tracking)
> > > {
> > > - munmap(self->buffer, variant->buffer_size);
> > > - munmap(self->bitmap, DIV_ROUND_UP(self->bitmap_size, BITS_PER_BYTE));
> > > + unsigned long size = variant->buffer_size;
> > > +
> > > + if (variant->hugepages)
> > > + size = __ALIGN_KERNEL(variant->buffer_size, HUGEPAGE_SIZE);
> > > + munmap(self->buffer, size);
> > > + free(self->buffer);
> > > + free(self->bitmap);
> > > teardown_iommufd(self->fd, _metadata);
> >
> > munmap followed by free isn't right..
>
> You are right. I re-checked with Copilot. It says the same thing.
> I think the whole posix_memalign() + mmap() confuses me..
>
> Yet, should the bitmap pair with free() since it's allocated by a
> posix_memalign() call?
>
> > This code is using the glibc allocator to get a bunch of pages mmap'd
> > to an aligned location then replacing the pages with MAP_SHARED and
> > maybe HAP_HUGETLB versions.
>
> And I studied some use cases from Copilot. It says that, to use
> the combination of posix_memalign+mmap, we should do:
> aligned_ptr = posix_memalign(pagesize, pagesize);
> unmap(aligned_ptr, pagesize);
> mapped = mmap(aligned_ptr, pagesize, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_FIXED, -1, 0);
> munmap(mapped, pagesize);
> // No free() after munmap().
> ---breakdown---
> Before `posix_memalign()`:
> [ heap memory unused ]
>
> After `posix_memalign()`:
> [ posix_memalign() memory ] ← managed by malloc/free
> ↑ aligned_ptr
>
> After `munmap(aligned_ptr)`:
> [ unmapped memory ] ← allocator no longer owns it
Incorrect. The allocator has no idea about the munmap and munmap
doesn't disturb any of the allocator tracking structures.
> After `mmap(aligned_ptr, ..., MAP_FIXED)`:
> [ anonymous mmap region ] ← fully remapped, under your control
> ↑ mapped
> ---end---
No, this is wrong.
> It points out that the heap bookkeeping will be silently clobbered
> without the munmap() in-between (like we are doing):
Nope, doesn't work like that.
> ---breakdown---
> After `posix_memalign()`:
> [ posix_memalign() memory ] ← malloc thinks it owns this
>
> Then `mmap(aligned_ptr, ..., MAP_FIXED)`:
> [ anonymous mmap region ] ← malloc still thinks it owns this (!)
> ↑ mapped
> ---end---
Yes, this is correct and what we are doing here. The allocator always
owns it and we are just replacing the memory with a different mmap.
> It also gives a simpler solution for a memory that is not huge
> page backed but huge page aligned (our !variant->hugepage case):
> ---code---
> void *ptr;
> size_t alignment = 2 * 1024 * 1024; // or whatever HUGEPAGE_SIZE was
> size_t size = variant->buffer_size;
>
> // Step 1: Use posix_memalign to get an aligned pointer
> if (posix_memalign(&ptr, alignment, size) != 0) {
> perror("posix_memalign");
> return -1;
> }
Also no, the main point of this is to inject MAP_SHARED which
posix_memalign cannot not do.
> Also, for a huge page case, there is no need of posix_memalign():
> "Hugepages are not part of the standard heap, so allocator functions
> like posix_memalign() or malloc() don't help and can even get in the
> way."
> Instead, it suggests a cleaner version without posix_memalign():
> ---code---
> void *addr = mmap(NULL, variant->buffer_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> MAP_SHARED | MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_HUGETLB | MAP_POPULATE,
> -1, 0);
> if (addr == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); return -1; }
> ---end---
Yes, we could do this only for MAP_HUGETLB, but it doesn't help the
normal case with MAP_SHARED.
So I would leave it alone, use the version I showed.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-17 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-16 5:02 [PATCH rc 0/4] Fix iommufd selftest FAIL and warnings with v6.16 Nicolin Chen
2025-06-16 5:02 ` [PATCH rc 1/4] iommufd/selftest: Fix iommufd_dirty_tracking with large hugepage sizes Nicolin Chen
2025-06-16 16:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-17 2:02 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-06-17 11:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2025-06-17 21:23 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-06-17 23:01 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-17 23:46 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-06-18 11:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-16 5:02 ` [PATCH rc 2/4] iommufd/selftest: Add missing close(mfd) in memfd_mmap() Nicolin Chen
2025-06-16 16:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-16 5:02 ` [PATCH rc 3/4] iommufd/selftest: Add asserts testing global mfd Nicolin Chen
2025-06-16 16:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-16 5:02 ` [PATCH rc 4/4] iommufd/selftest: Fix build warnings due to uninitialized mfd Nicolin Chen
2025-06-16 16:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
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=20250617115948.GV1174925@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=steven.sistare@oracle.com \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox