Re: [PATCH 6/7] mm, fs: introduce file_operations->post_mmap()

[Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>]

On Tue 26-09-17 14:41:53, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Ross Zwisler
> <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:19:21PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Ross Zwisler
> > <>
> >> > This decision can only be made (in this
> >> > proposed scheme) *after* the inode->i_mapping->i_mmap  tree has been
> >> > populated, which means we need another call into the filesystem after this
> >> > insertion has happened.
> >>
> >> I get that, but it seems over-engineered and something that can also
> >> be safely cleaned up after the fact by the code path that is disabling
> >> DAX.
> >
> > I don't think you can safely clean it up after the fact because some thread
> > might have already called ->mmap() to set up the vma->vm_flags for their new
> > mapping, but they haven't added it to inode->i_mapping->i_mmap.
> 
> If madvise(MADV_NOHUGEPAGE) can dynamically change vm_flags, then the
> DAX disable path can as well. VM_MIXEDMAP looks to be a nop for normal
> memory mappings.
> 
> > The inode->i_mapping->i_mmap tree is the only way (that I know of at least)
> > that the filesystem has any idea about about the mapping.  This is the method
> > by which we would try and clean up mapping flags, if we were to do so, and
> > it's the only way that the filesystem can know whether or not mappings exist.
> >
> > The only way that I could think of to make this safely work is to have the
> > insertion into the inode->i_mapping->i_mmap tree be our sync point.  After
> > that the filesystem and the mapping code can communicate on the state of DAX,
> > but before that I think it's basically indeterminate.
> 
> If we lose the race and leak VM_HUGEPAGE to a non-DAX mapping what
> breaks? I'd rather be in favor of not setting VM_HUGEPAGE at all in
> the ->mmap() handler and let the default THP policy take over. In
> fact, see transparent_hugepage_enabled() we already auto-enable huge
> page support for dax mappings regardless of VM_HUGEPAGE.

Hum, this is an interesting option. So do you suggest that filesystems
supporting DAX would always setup mappings with VM_MIXEDMAP and without
VM_HUGEPAGE and thus we'd get rid of dependency on S_DAX flag in ->mmap?
That could actually work. The only possible issue I can see is that
VM_MIXEDMAP is still slightly different from normal page mappings and it
could have some performance implications - e.g. copy_page_range() does more
work on VM_MIXEDMAP mappings but not on normal page mappings.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

--
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>