From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm: Send a single IPI to TLB flush multiple pages when unmapping
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:07:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150416080722.GL14842@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150416063826.GA7721@blaptop>
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 03:38:26PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hello Mel,
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:28:55PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 02:16:49PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2015, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > > On 04/15/2015 06:42 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > > An IPI is sent to flush remote TLBs when a page is unmapped that was
> > > > > recently accessed by other CPUs. There are many circumstances where this
> > > > > happens but the obvious one is kswapd reclaiming pages belonging to a
> > > > > running process as kswapd and the task are likely running on separate CPUs.
> > > > >
> > > > > On small machines, this is not a significant problem but as machine
> > > > > gets larger with more cores and more memory, the cost of these IPIs can
> > > > > be high. This patch uses a structure similar in principle to a pagevec
> > > > > to collect a list of PFNs and CPUs that require flushing. It then sends
> > > > > one IPI to flush the list of PFNs. A new TLB flush helper is required for
> > > > > this and one is added for x86. Other architectures will need to decide if
> > > > > batching like this is both safe and worth the memory overhead. Specifically
> > > > > the requirement is;
> > > > >
> > > > > If a clean page is unmapped and not immediately flushed, the
> > > > > architecture must guarantee that a write to that page from a CPU
> > > > > with a cached TLB entry will trap a page fault.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is essentially what the kernel already depends on but the window is
> > > > > much larger with this patch applied and is worth highlighting.
> > > >
> > > > This means we already have a (hard to hit?) data corruption
> > > > issue in the kernel. We can lose data if we unmap a writable
> > > > but not dirty pte from a file page, and the task writes before
> > > > we flush the TLB.
> > >
> > > I don't think so. IIRC, when the CPU needs to set the dirty bit,
> > > it doesn't just do that in its TLB entry, but has to fetch and update
> > > the actual pte entry - and at that point discovers it's no longer
> > > valid so traps, as Mel says.
> > >
> >
> > This is what I'm expecting i.e. clean->dirty transition is write-through
> > to the PTE which is now unmapped and it traps. I'm assuming there is an
> > architectural guarantee that it happens but could not find an explicit
> > statement in the docs. I'm hoping Dave or Andi can check with the relevant
> > people on my behalf.
>
> A dumb question. It's not related to your patch but MADV_FREE.
>
> clean->dirty transition is *atomic* as well as write-through?
This is the TLB cache clean->dirty transition so it's not 100% clear what you
are asking. It both needs to be write-through and the TLB updates must happen
before the actual data write to cache or memory and it must be ordered.
> I'm really confusing.
> It seems most arches use xchg for ptep_get_and_clear so it's
> atomic but some of arches without defining __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_GET_AND_CLEAR
> will use non-atomic version in include/asm-generic/pgtable.h.
>
> #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_GET_AND_CLEAR
> static inline pte_t ptep_get_and_clear(struct mm_struct *mm,
> unsigned long address,
> pte_t *ptep)
> {
> pte_t pte = *ptep;
> pte_clear(mm, address, ptep);
> return pte;
> }
> #endif
>
And if they are using this, they need to be ok that it's not atomic but
it's not clear what you are asking.
> I hope they have own lock or something to protect a race between software
> and hardware(ie, CPU set dirty bit by itself).
>
Or they're UP.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-16 8:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-15 10:42 [RFC PATCH 0/4] TLB flush multiple pages with a single IPI Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 10:42 ` [PATCH 1/4] x86, mm: Trace when an IPI is about to be sent Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 10:42 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm: Send a single IPI to TLB flush multiple pages when unmapping Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 21:03 ` Rik van Riel
2015-04-15 21:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2015-04-15 21:28 ` Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 21:32 ` Dave Hansen
2015-04-16 6:38 ` Minchan Kim
2015-04-16 8:07 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2015-04-16 8:29 ` Minchan Kim
2015-04-16 9:19 ` Mel Gorman
2015-04-16 23:30 ` Minchan Kim
2015-04-15 22:20 ` Andi Kleen
2015-04-15 22:53 ` Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 10:42 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: Gather more PFNs before sending a TLB to flush unmapped pages Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 11:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-15 12:15 ` Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 12:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-15 12:56 ` Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 10:42 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: migrate: Batch TLB flushing when unmapping pages for migration Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 21:06 ` Hugh Dickins
2015-04-15 21:44 ` Mel Gorman
2015-04-15 23:50 ` Hugh Dickins
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-04-16 10:22 [RFC PATCH 0/4] TLB flush multiple pages with a single IPI v2 Mel Gorman
2015-04-16 10:22 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm: Send a single IPI to TLB flush multiple pages when unmapping Mel Gorman
2015-04-16 15:52 ` Rik van Riel
2015-04-16 19:21 ` Hugh Dickins
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=20150416080722.GL14842@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).