From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 327871A2C34 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 23:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719530389; cv=none; b=E1H6PCOexLSyDMsPgOMBK3duT8wl+ODDAfcrsGSaCgwxrmuM87gTfIAwFSwjE9HpClcQxBw6OxtbmClqNRYcprrdahHHgBU/+5rtc0ZrFZKsZMjxupnxYztXsu3ATOm/fn3jFpM6rI+3NV0mwXKo90FRM9CZN0XSzZubY83ja80= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719530389; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PPRwhvydXhxUZQexsx5RnnndFRg7TQ1NyXIyNCDp3+A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=A+cy651+JHmnnjabZOl/SebHYjrIFsfXDLuV7zF8OCTodv2EaDHIHFH9EeKHlJsRZhzjLiZPioqFpXm+hmtrkBF6R2dfvW1YxE/bQHz8X61yxffOe22DjTcCf9v2tKDhJje4/eOUX+ZMyj/UeifOc3YRIu+lFwandLa+bhvPWrU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=Das3UBC5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Das3UBC5" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1719530386; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=D1YXe5ol6L04xULXPymw3GJypJtsSF73vsgstdp57Og=; b=Das3UBC5uwu53d6KuHIcWLPJgB8U6piOfukeBVvZIGn499FXb6wfPjmQkt5kht5hSzRZxw KNCcIVt12QcwWiFGeN1eQKqeo9o2VXaOmQ5XgJh72gsNjDat4HbRuh3J+VooksslmfotaU +awfgmbyPUw9LMV00aKphjy6y0k9vCI= Received: from mail-qv1-f70.google.com (mail-qv1-f70.google.com [209.85.219.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-438--x0VhxYIO0SIM9TcZ8N2Hw-1; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 19:19:44 -0400 X-MC-Unique: -x0VhxYIO0SIM9TcZ8N2Hw-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6ad803bc570so88606d6.1 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 16:19:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719530383; x=1720135183; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=D1YXe5ol6L04xULXPymw3GJypJtsSF73vsgstdp57Og=; b=oCK7oGu+4xlI0WSvEYGnqpn3okdBsBZ+fvF4ryjqqDwNKQz1FieQSVrLs1mv218yow hYdw0WTarchkErtJJzO5kmv5zHpERWPH1TaXe9wOHSWHvozxpmFGh6b1DqWm9eWM6HyO xbmfYpf59g/cn+SDLNJmVpC7gRZMX5aEBHP14spuZSrKzAOh3agNMpgx2J8mb6rQJyPh LcBT1XIyaFmioDcyJ6xnDIwLnlUM69ZlRcNAHOx8l1WhyW9WcmnSZWxzqiHewKvYt2hl AsdvR8tCk/dTwB5+MY3LslBSw21l3b865NJLG8jpt9KCHy0xqINYArkladhwjxBJssel rIog== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVxxzNGx268uohRDyy903CbhbvtV6yivaaqhPqQ2jRKJtEiCdZ8gKKqyz4Fz/H39OIfPFgR2IrfTGQgdPP+M6TAJt91BCw3 X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx1qPI5xA2hxyaVQrGL+dzKIg4Bh1TmFaxeS7mKRPwtF2/yieGL XjT+mcZkANjCj7D+Jcp5RIeidQ8DzcG2tW5TytJKKRKq89Znr5sFMnZ7hXdJ7eVOz2S50vbX8Iq UQ0u+r7IX3bNT8gRjrfK4tgXeqq+MVcyCwchKSPv7rBMcXi7GGEH4Rg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2905:b0:79c:12a4:538b with SMTP id af79cd13be357-79c12a458a7mr732289085a.2.1719530383187; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 16:19:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFINKkJ5VHiTiiGezMh5c/t5IqK3PUIBzUnqYyYCVAOhNr45JVSecJ4xWQgBsizyziOSOPc1w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2905:b0:79c:12a4:538b with SMTP id af79cd13be357-79c12a458a7mr732286585a.2.1719530382525; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 16:19:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x1n (pool-99-254-121-117.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [99.254.121.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-79d692ea2ccsm22783185a.88.2024.06.27.16.19.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 27 Jun 2024 16:19:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 19:19:40 -0400 From: Peter Xu To: Yang Shi Cc: yangge1116@126.com, david@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] mm: gup: do not call try_grab_folio() in slow path Message-ID: References: <20240627221413.671680-1-yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240627221413.671680-1-yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Yang, On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 03:14:13PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote: > The try_grab_folio() is supposed to be used in fast path and it elevates > folio refcount by using add ref unless zero. We are guaranteed to have > at least one stable reference in slow path, so the simple atomic add > could be used. The performance difference should be trivial, but the > misuse may be confusing and misleading. This first paragraph is IMHO misleading itself.. I think we should mention upfront the important bit, on the user impact. Here IMO the user impact should be: Linux may fail longterm pin in some releavnt paths when applied over CMA reserved blocks. And if to extend a bit, that include not only slow-gup but also the new memfd pinning, because both of them used try_grab_folio() which used to be only for fast-gup. It's great this patch renamed try_grab_folio() to try_grab_folio_fast(), I think that definitely helps on reducing the abuse in the future. However then with that the subject becomes misleading, because it says "do not call try_grab_folio()" however after this patch we keep using it. Maybe rename the subject to "mm: Fix longterm pin on slow gup and memfd pin regress"? > > In another thread [1] a kernel warning was reported when pinning folio > in CMA memory when launching SEV virtual machine. The splat looks like: > > [ 464.325306] WARNING: CPU: 13 PID: 6734 at mm/gup.c:1313 __get_user_pages+0x423/0x520 > [ 464.325464] CPU: 13 PID: 6734 Comm: qemu-kvm Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.6.33+ #6 > [ 464.325477] RIP: 0010:__get_user_pages+0x423/0x520 > [ 464.325515] Call Trace: > [ 464.325520] > [ 464.325523] ? __get_user_pages+0x423/0x520 > [ 464.325528] ? __warn+0x81/0x130 > [ 464.325536] ? __get_user_pages+0x423/0x520 > [ 464.325541] ? report_bug+0x171/0x1a0 > [ 464.325549] ? handle_bug+0x3c/0x70 > [ 464.325554] ? exc_invalid_op+0x17/0x70 > [ 464.325558] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 > [ 464.325567] ? __get_user_pages+0x423/0x520 > [ 464.325575] __gup_longterm_locked+0x212/0x7a0 > [ 464.325583] internal_get_user_pages_fast+0xfb/0x190 > [ 464.325590] pin_user_pages_fast+0x47/0x60 > [ 464.325598] sev_pin_memory+0xca/0x170 [kvm_amd] > [ 464.325616] sev_mem_enc_register_region+0x81/0x130 [kvm_amd] > > Per the analysis done by yangge, when starting the SEV virtual machine, > it will call pin_user_pages_fast(..., FOLL_LONGTERM, ...) to pin the > memory. But the page is in CMA area, so fast GUP will fail then > fallback to the slow path due to the longterm pinnalbe check in > try_grab_folio(). > The slow path will try to pin the pages then migrate them out of CMA > area. But the slow path also uses try_grab_folio() to pin the page, > it will also fail due to the same check then the above warning > is triggered. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/1719478388-31917-1-git-send-email-yangge1116@126.com/ > > Fixes: 57edfcfd3419 ("mm/gup: accelerate thp gup even for "pages != NULL"") > Cc: [6.6+] > Reported-by: yangge > Signed-off-by: Yang Shi The patch itself looks mostly ok to me. There's still some "cleanup" part mangled together, e.g., the real meat should be avoiding the folio_is_longterm_pinnable() check in relevant paths. The rest (e.g. switch slow-gup / memfd pin to use folio_ref_add() not try_get_folio(), and renames) could be good cleanups. So a smaller fix might be doable, but again I don't have a strong opinion here. Thanks, -- Peter Xu