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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 4471DC76191 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:47:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0487122CED for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:47:23 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0487122CED 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 90FE18E0002; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:47:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 8BFC16B0007; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:47:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 7D5B78E0002; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:47:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from mail-qk1-f200.google.com (mail-qk1-f200.google.com [209.85.222.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5F46B0006 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:47:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id t124so45285466qkh.3 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:47:23 -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; bh=aREd7oX/KjjR1y+/DoK7i/ri4F4zE0JK5o/p5Emjkas=; b=SC8bsHKa4DWsBL0OvVE5iyscZZ52RyE7IeZiajhMRRoki1QslSn7Utni+xZArHz4oB HOmBcg8U9nhyb6q0HfEtJsg0vVU5F8pMRZ61l41vVTiSYu7hd8weWoGee+gWm0JbWABw +3DoHLKkxxQH3sIQhDqy0ykjNbRYbldLasm40yVqv08zXHdkCTk78RFg9uCLSePSopjG EmTn+GfMf32dKXnz79r4nbPeurOUIP4Qq7Eoahd3/Zjtw3RFxJPdJglkD34i74zb6271 26toifPbEPML9q9wJ4HmLHUdX3uobFtwst2emw3L32bMjGK+dAY3kiX86zE/q9F5ZaUp CcrQ== X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mst@redhat.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mst@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXINIGekZLWoRe6mSHp52RzEoNhVmINiwvxkd86/v9iRxoe74rO 3vVJLIBTsS6UgiUUCIpalQ3WbZFr265iDOUcYOsejxNOGUUhhzun5ZBAYiWCt3EMoQOiSVNEccf KWnHlmrS1W7Sq96g8YXMJAKOxYx0xJ7VeoOdrgO3x/SpRynnqQqRSqW0T2veomLAHJQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1456:: with SMTP id i22mr61550402qkl.170.1564148843121; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:47:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1456:: with SMTP id i22mr61550362qkl.170.1564148842494; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:47:22 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1564148842; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=d2kS4orJKAU3K9AFDBgylXZEql+bEgCf67XqR7OY4+Elafo+8WYDGxoVNTNXWN39wd kUeqMNwJrybITWE6ysq47JFQK/xnjX7LMYIemKp/qKHT06hjGMyzwHbpaTGuX/iLumra 8NUHNbreLnwld+SZ9hW7ZMlr8T/1Up9BuKWm6KLA/bxjeLNR9MGh0HRLWRSmdlfqWcTd jGtY9kxpbJhA28eIjr2R7rGuWRzdZcsAS0semPAJDjauRvbbsPuyjlzqjBTBDfASMGWq fwNkFVlP+XQ9D4bE+M0khdlPEf7btcN/1HVcma6YB1yh5PxFrd6OIOJej5KKPbBmhCWt APZA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=aREd7oX/KjjR1y+/DoK7i/ri4F4zE0JK5o/p5Emjkas=; b=iVHTvNTseO4L5nlhmtcqQe1Hp+YEjagPt8LSN017L42w4tJdB0AT2d+A4vsmjgv6gC QCjKv6+BPDslPgUwB6ikunic6ZxCKvOHjVIDCMzF62DUg4P3JVXVFL8BQyaIZuJ9p5cF PoQQbAHh/FMLdG4uvuitaL6j4QZ2BlDkdGV1uLGQqlJURS0Jrs+0RvxRjGdiecPjHdH7 1JgClu4imn8iaD5Wiv+79pdsY8vhSUf2TNQierMVeB2qaePdCDCpWvbhdAUqVmT5a1b9 xMfiPfkpAIwgXZ3t4wuSwUi+Ek07182g74syCgatggCzUKinpsMk/8CAKEITws9DUWg/ 6b3w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mst@redhat.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mst@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id n2sor38604628qvn.72.2019.07.26.06.47.22 for (Google Transport Security); Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mst@redhat.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.65; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mst@redhat.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mst@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzVdYsizVTGT9hdpWznFaUhHBwNJSFBNQoI8apQUSuT6ROsP77q6nipE0mfzkXGrjdjl9uw3A== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:ba0b:: with SMTP id w11mr68077058qvf.71.1564148842235; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com ([212.92.104.165]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g2sm21326394qkm.31.2019.07.26.06.47.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:47:12 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Jason Wang Cc: syzbot , aarcange@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, christian@brauner.io, davem@davemloft.net, ebiederm@xmission.com, elena.reshetova@intel.com, guro@fb.com, hch@infradead.org, james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, jglisse@redhat.com, keescook@chromium.org, ldv@altlinux.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, luto@amacapital.net, mhocko@suse.com, mingo@kernel.org, namit@vmware.com, peterz@infradead.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, wad@chromium.org Subject: Re: WARNING in __mmdrop Message-ID: <20190726094353-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20190725012149-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <55e8930c-2695-365f-a07b-3ad169654d28@redhat.com> <20190725042651-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <84bb2e31-0606-adff-cf2a-e1878225a847@redhat.com> <20190725092332-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <11802a8a-ce41-f427-63d5-b6a4cf96bb3f@redhat.com> <20190726074644-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <5cc94f15-b229-a290-55f3-8295266edb2b@redhat.com> <20190726082837-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: 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 Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 08:53:18PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/7/26 下午8:38, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 08:00:58PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On 2019/7/26 下午7:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:25:25PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > > On 2019/7/25 下午9:26, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > > > Exactly, and that's the reason actually I use synchronize_rcu() there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So the concern is still the possible synchronize_expedited()? > > > > > > I think synchronize_srcu_expedited. > > > > > > > > > > > > synchronize_expedited sends lots of IPI and is bad for realtime VMs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can I do this > > > > > > > on through another series on top of the incoming V2? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > The question is this: is this still a gain if we switch to the > > > > > > more expensive srcu? If yes then we can keep the feature on, > > > > > I think we only care about the cost on srcu_read_lock() which looks pretty > > > > > tiny form my point of view. Which is basically a READ_ONCE() + WRITE_ONCE(). > > > > > > > > > > Of course I can benchmark to see the difference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if not we'll put it off until next release and think > > > > > > of better solutions. rcu->srcu is just a find and replace, > > > > > > don't see why we need to defer that. can be a separate patch > > > > > > for sure, but we need to know how well it works. > > > > > I think I get here, let me try to do that in V2 and let's see the numbers. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > It looks to me for tree rcu, its srcu_read_lock() have a mb() which is too > > > expensive for us. > > I will try to ponder using vq lock in some way. > > Maybe with trylock somehow ... > > > Ok, let me retry if necessary (but I do remember I end up with deadlocks > last try). > > > > > > > > > If we just worry about the IPI, > > With synchronize_rcu what I would worry about is that guest is stalled > > > Can this synchronize_rcu() be triggered by guest? If yes, there are several > other MMU notifiers that can block. Is vhost something special here? Sorry, let me explain: guests (and tasks in general) can trigger activity that will make synchronize_rcu take a long time. Thus blocking an mmu notifier until synchronize_rcu finishes is a bad idea. > > > because system is busy because of other guests. > > With expedited it's the IPIs... > > > > The current synchronize_rcu()  can force a expedited grace period: > > void synchronize_rcu(void) > { >         ... >         if (rcu_blocking_is_gp()) > return; >         if (rcu_gp_is_expedited()) > synchronize_rcu_expedited(); > else > wait_rcu_gp(call_rcu); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_rcu); An admin can force rcu to finish faster, trading interrupts for responsiveness. > > > > can we do something like in > > > vhost_invalidate_vq_start()? > > > > > >         if (map) { > > >                 /* In order to avoid possible IPIs with > > >                  * synchronize_rcu_expedited() we use call_rcu() + > > >                  * completion. > > > */ > > > init_completion(&c.completion); > > >                 call_rcu(&c.rcu_head, vhost_finish_vq_invalidation); > > > wait_for_completion(&c.completion); > > >                 vhost_set_map_dirty(vq, map, index); > > > vhost_map_unprefetch(map); > > >         } > > > > > > ? > > Why would that be faster than synchronize_rcu? > > > No faster but no IPI. > Sorry I still don't see the point. synchronize_rcu doesn't normally do an IPI either. > > > > > > > > There's one other thing that bothers me, and that is that > > > > for large rings which are not physically contiguous > > > > we don't implement the optimization. > > > > > > > > For sure, that can wait, but I think eventually we should > > > > vmap large rings. > > > > > > Yes, worth to try. But using direct map has its own advantage: it can use > > > hugepage that vmap can't > > > > > > Thanks > > Sure, so we can do that for small rings. > > > Yes, that's possible but should be done on top. > > Thanks Absolutely. Need to fix up the bugs first. -- MST