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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable 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 7FC2CC282DA for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:49:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E2FF20880 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:49:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3E2FF20880 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id BE7EA6B0003; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:49:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id B6F506B0006; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:49:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id A38716B0007; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:49:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from mail-qk1-f198.google.com (mail-qk1-f198.google.com [209.85.222.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D4546B0003 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:49:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk1-f198.google.com with SMTP id p3so836164qkj.18 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:49:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-original-authentication-results:x-gm-message-state:date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=8xuoB2/3vIg/HZqZlWvtOgSsUGoe2yCUq/S0glsmvbI=; b=AaiB2JYQIrNDVGBUFDFqdVlEODmM0jcuAoTnyXC9lOnb0D04FEWTszT8KR9/ATIIR9 gdec1uB4GRgkCVhG7k3MHOefkQsWRom+6AIuRSaNBA4SDz/WY0mvC+gC3XQ9nrppR49W xXzFUXeMuVn3xOO2TQAlm/zdGyEM4jr/DR500Kko2mdICe3cSzYWm/kBUBU8ev7vzE+N uMo2JpXRHRHKwdnP1ozPJ476qzYXIs4y3lo4dePewNhamTvMwdpchllsxdZwM6YwymzW 9Uhe+WyfrcFONszA0ZXoxJqEtjG3Wycl7Y/M0deAtF9JhqHsJcfCibRyq5FeRaX8VWbu 8vsg== X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jglisse@redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jglisse@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUnTPpNhnI6tym2jPXd3CZneUA4F30Mt2nmC9Lt4qxc19SjwZJs vOlLlHkiSr1P8azUYOq8DzBNMer+IYx9vngES18xmGfP/aaNe9YrJeYuAlVqhXJL+pk0QWg8kjW L1X67qH2JpqI5uol4/qfpejwHv9gx5IcbfVM96tybqQMe6yTRXDirfaTsOfOh5O/HQA== X-Received: by 2002:a37:c20c:: with SMTP id i12mr62109108qkm.94.1555444188249; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:49:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwCml5AbILZSiQjVCUlZxw//wQMGT7EWQrD8wROcLb49ljkVgEpbtuViRI/GDAGAlQRgCeS X-Received: by 2002:a37:c20c:: with SMTP id i12mr62109026qkm.94.1555444187088; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:49:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1555444187; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=QM9+pSMwlI2ZBBv2JjSOZV2ouYV3j5pHaLTspd0QCzj2Be8x24iFR5jjY6304pxKgP fJ4Hef+roS7944kqYkoRTGA300JDlmJpy7fGh/CDmoPdJ0tjFhhyRxAQE6uVHCkPAqJo WkXDHTF9PsE+NZzmRmMJ4e8bO4ZS5fgnQYn3pAr7UUcOUeZ9ACPpF6R9Ge3oZdnXtqw/ UBmJSHQyLJOJGT5wrKxKBVJwqn7Og2mhjmMceRJHLinKN2DnAjSebKepnvyZ7BhLE9IX g2tUGa+0eD9toMecTmAvNAoWF86s4UzkOLwPnyIri0oDAMhaAwKRH2ulIeUXFNsn3ASw OBkQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=8xuoB2/3vIg/HZqZlWvtOgSsUGoe2yCUq/S0glsmvbI=; b=pNAs8mxMQDm7YVHXLvq15JtQ7DpNvmd4hi0CZ66oXgJKvjuJiHHo2SkKfyQnqa/vVY rttuaLi0DR3DtGWNUMolt0FXCr8L3MMRjLcPPUMg3xZxpX5msaI4Xj4jA0M/+1lYuoF1 mOjOLpmkspgfRdi/qfGuHCG2AWD2yOuTl65BeUZK3sYsNHqKKBJWhiaB+ccQuBWuBbLT TujDYby83fqmD3/LF+4b1FaQVklWXn4mRssPHVm3C+L27+9YiF817JMOOS3iEtAP5QMm nE9+txgubVS3JPnXrSOAeciI+tJMVrLlDM+3Lx/eQef9+TWUBhph2+egDiXEeYM1f77U ntMA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jglisse@redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jglisse@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com. [209.132.183.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h37si5373592qvh.81.2019.04.16.12.49.46 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jglisse@redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.183.28; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jglisse@redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jglisse@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6551308339E; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:49:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.20.6.236]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8618360141; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:49:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:49:36 -0400 From: Jerome Glisse To: Dan Williams Cc: Kent Overstreet , Boaz Harrosh , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Linux MM , John Hubbard , Jan Kara , Alexander Viro , Johannes Thumshirn , Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , Ming Lei , Jason Gunthorpe , Matthew Wilcox , Steve French , linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, Yan Zheng , Sage Weil , Ilya Dryomov , Alex Elder , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Van Hensbergen , Latchesar Ionkov , Mike Marshall , Martin Brandenburg , devel@lists.orangefs.org, Dominique Martinet , v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, Coly Li , linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, Ernesto =?iso-8859-1?Q?A=2E_Fern=E1ndez?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/15] Keep track of GUPed pages in fs and block Message-ID: <20190416194936.GD21526@redhat.com> References: <20190411210834.4105-1-jglisse@redhat.com> <2c124cc4-b97e-ee28-2926-305bc6bc74bd@plexistor.com> <20190416185922.GA12818@kmo-pixel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.44]); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:49:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:12:27PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 11:59 AM Kent Overstreet > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:35:04PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 05:08:19PM -0400, jglisse@redhat.com wrote: > > > > From: Jérôme Glisse > > > > > > > > This patchset depends on various small fixes [1] and also on patchset > > > > which introduce put_user_page*() [2] and thus is 5.3 material as those > > > > pre-requisite will get in 5.2 at best. Nonetheless i am posting it now > > > > so that it can get review and comments on how and what should be done > > > > to test things. > > > > > > > > For various reasons [2] [3] we want to track page reference through GUP > > > > differently than "regular" page reference. Thus we need to keep track > > > > of how we got a page within the block and fs layer. To do so this patch- > > > > set change the bio_bvec struct to store a pfn and flags instead of a > > > > direct pointer to a page. This way we can flag page that are coming from > > > > GUP. > > > > > > > > This patchset is divided as follow: > > > > - First part of the patchset is just small cleanup i believe they > > > > can go in as his assuming people are ok with them. > > > > > > > > > > - Second part convert bio_vec->bv_page to bio_vec->bv_pfn this is > > > > done in multi-step, first we replace all direct dereference of > > > > the field by call to inline helper, then we introduce macro for > > > > bio_bvec that are initialized on the stack. Finaly we change the > > > > bv_page field to bv_pfn. > > > > > > Why do we need a bv_pfn. Why not just use the lowest bit of the page-ptr > > > as a flag (pointer always aligned to 64 bytes in our case). > > > > > > So yes we need an inline helper for reference of the page but is it not clearer > > > that we assume a page* and not any kind of pfn ? > > > It will not be the first place using low bits of a pointer for flags. > > > > > > That said. Why we need it at all? I mean why not have it as a bio flag. If it exist > > > at all that a user has a GUP and none-GUP pages to IO at the same request he/she > > > can just submit them as two separate BIOs (chained at the block layer). > > > > > > Many users just submit one page bios and let elevator merge them any way. > > > > Let's please not add additional flags and weirdness to struct bio - "if this > > flag is set interpret one way, if not interpret another" - or eventually bios > > will be as bad as skbuffs. I would much prefer just changing bv_page to bv_pfn. > > This all reminds of the failed attempt to teach the block layer to > operate without pages: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20150316201640.33102.33761.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com/ > > > > > Question though - why do we need a flag for whether a page is a GUP page or not? > > Couldn't the needed information just be determined by what range the pfn is not > > (i.e. whether or not it has a struct page associated with it)? > > That amounts to a pfn_valid() check which is a bit heavier than if we > can store a flag in the bv_pfn entry directly. > > I'd say create a new PFN_* flag, and make bv_pfn a 'pfn_t' rather than > an 'unsigned long'. > > That said, I'm still in favor of Jan's proposal to just make the > bv_page semantics uniform. Otherwise we're complicating this core > infrastructure for some yet to be implemented GPU memory management > capabilities with yet to be determined value. Circle back when that > value is clear, but in the meantime fix the GUP bug. This has nothing to do with GPU, what make you think so ? Here i am trying to solve GUP and to keep the value of knowing wether a page has been GUP or not. I argue that if we bias every page in every bio then we loose that information and thus the value. I gave the page protection mechanisms as an example that would be impacted but it is not the only one. Knowing if a page has been GUP can be useful for memory reclaimation, compaction, NUMA balancing, ... Also page that are going through a bio in one thread might be under some other fs specific operation in another thread which would be block by GUP but do not need to be block by I/O (ie fs can either wait on the I/O or knows that it is safe to proceed even if the page is under I/O). Hence i believe that by making every page look the same we do loose valuable information. More over the complexity of making all the page in bio have a reference count bias is much bigger than the changes needed to keep track of wether the page did came from GUP or not. Cheers, Jérôme