[PATCH v2 2/2] mm: Allocate THP on hugezeropage wp-fault
Ryan Roberts
ryan.roberts at arm.com
Fri Sep 6 01:43:25 PDT 2024
On 06/09/2024 08:05, Dev Jain wrote:
>
> On 9/5/24 18:44, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 04/09/2024 11:09, Dev Jain wrote:
>>> Introduce do_huge_zero_wp_pmd() to handle wp-fault on a hugezeropage and
>>> replace it with a PMD-mapped THP. Change the helpers introduced in the
>>> previous patch to flush TLB entry corresponding to the hugezeropage,
>>> and preserve PMD uffd-wp marker. In case of failure, fallback to
>>> splitting the PMD.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain at arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/huge_mm.h | 6 ++++
>>> mm/huge_memory.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>> mm/memory.c | 5 +--
>>> 3 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>> index e25d9ebfdf89..fdd2cf473a3c 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>> @@ -9,6 +9,12 @@
>>> #include <linux/kobject.h>
>>> vm_fault_t do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf);
>>> +vm_fault_t thp_fault_alloc(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>> + unsigned long haddr, struct folio **foliop,
>>> + unsigned long addr);
>>> +void map_pmd_thp(struct folio *folio, struct vm_fault *vmf,
>>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long haddr,
>>> + pgtable_t pgtable);
>> I don't think you are using either of these outside of huge_memory.c, so not
>> sure you need to declare them here or make them non-static?
>
> As pointed out by Kirill, you are right, I forgot to drop these from my previous
> approach.
>
>>
>>> int copy_huge_pmd(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, struct mm_struct *src_mm,
>>> pmd_t *dst_pmd, pmd_t *src_pmd, unsigned long addr,
>>> struct vm_area_struct *dst_vma, struct vm_area_struct *src_vma);
>>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> index 58125fbcc532..150163ad77d3 100644
>>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> @@ -943,9 +943,9 @@ unsigned long thp_get_unmapped_area(struct file *filp,
>>> unsigned long addr,
>>> }
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(thp_get_unmapped_area);
>>> -static vm_fault_t thp_fault_alloc(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct
>>> vm_area_struct *vma,
>>> - unsigned long haddr, struct folio **foliop,
>>> - unsigned long addr)
>>> +vm_fault_t thp_fault_alloc(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>> + unsigned long haddr, struct folio **foliop,
>>> + unsigned long addr)
>>> {
>>> struct folio *folio = vma_alloc_folio(gfp, order, vma, haddr, true);
>>> @@ -984,21 +984,29 @@ static void __thp_fault_success_stats(struct
>>> vm_area_struct *vma, int order)
>>> count_memcg_event_mm(vma->vm_mm, THP_FAULT_ALLOC);
>>> }
>>> -static void map_pmd_thp(struct folio *folio, struct vm_fault *vmf,
>>> - struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long haddr,
>>> - pgtable_t pgtable)
>>> +void map_pmd_thp(struct folio *folio, struct vm_fault *vmf,
>>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long haddr,
>>> + pgtable_t pgtable)
>>> {
>>> - pmd_t entry;
>>> + pmd_t entry, old_pmd;
>>> + bool is_pmd_none = pmd_none(*vmf->pmd);
>>> entry = mk_huge_pmd(&folio->page, vma->vm_page_prot);
>>> entry = maybe_pmd_mkwrite(pmd_mkdirty(entry), vma);
>>> folio_add_new_anon_rmap(folio, vma, haddr, RMAP_EXCLUSIVE);
>>> folio_add_lru_vma(folio, vma);
>>> - pgtable_trans_huge_deposit(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, pgtable);
>>> + if (!is_pmd_none) {
>>> + old_pmd = pmdp_huge_clear_flush(vma, haddr, vmf->pmd);
>>> + if (pmd_uffd_wp(old_pmd))
>>> + entry = pmd_mkuffd_wp(entry);
>> I don't really get this; entry is writable, so I wouldn't expect to also be
>> setting uffd-wp here? That combination is not allowed and is checked for in
>> page_table_check_pte_flags().
>>
>> It looks like you expect to get here in the uffd-wp-async case, which used to
>> cause the pmd to be split to ptes. I'm guessing (but don't know for sure) that
>> would cause the uffd-wp bit to be set in each of the new ptes, then during
>> fallback to handling the wp fault on the pte, uffd would handle it?
>
> I guess you are correct; I missed the WARN_ON() in page_table_check_pmd_flags(),
> but I did see, if I read the uffd code correctly, that mfill_atomic() will just
> return in case of pmd_trans_huge(*dst_pmd) while doing a uffd_copy to the
> destination
> location. So preserving pmd_uffd_wp is useless in case a THP is mapped, but I
> did not
> know that in fact it is supposed to be an invalid combination. So, I will drop it,
> unless someone has some other objection.
So what's the correct way to handle uffd-wp-async in wp_huge_pmd()? Just split
it? If so, you can revert your changes in memory.c.
>
>>
>>> + }
>>> + if (pgtable)
>>> + pgtable_trans_huge_deposit(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, pgtable);
>> Should this call be moved outside of here? It doesn't really feel like it
>> belongs. Could it be called before calling map_pmd_thp() for the site that has a
>> pgtable?
>
> Every other place I checked, they are doing this: make the entry -> deposit
> pgtable ->
> set_pmd_at(). I guess the general flow is to do the deposit based on the old
> pmd, before
> setting the new one. Which implies: I should at least move this check before I call
> pmdp_huge_clear_flush(). And, since vmf->pmd and creating the new entry has no
> relation,
> I am inclined to do what you are saying.
pgtable_trans_huge_deposit() is just adding the pgtable to a list so that if the
THP needs to be split in future, then we have preallocated the pte pgtable so
the operation can't fail. And enqueing it is just under the protection of the
PTL as far as I can tell. So I think the only ordering requirement is that you
both set the pmd and deposit the pgtable under the lock (without dropping it in
between). So you can deposit either before or after map_pmd_thp(). And
pmdp_huge_clear_flush() is irrelavent, I think?
>
>>
>>> set_pmd_at(vma->vm_mm, haddr, vmf->pmd, entry);
>>> update_mmu_cache_pmd(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pmd);
>>> add_mm_counter(vma->vm_mm, MM_ANONPAGES, HPAGE_PMD_NR);
>>> - mm_inc_nr_ptes(vma->vm_mm);
>>> + if (is_pmd_none)
>>> + mm_inc_nr_ptes(vma->vm_mm);
>>> }
>>> static vm_fault_t __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>> @@ -1576,6 +1584,50 @@ void huge_pmd_set_accessed(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>> spin_unlock(vmf->ptl);
>>> }
>>> +static vm_fault_t do_huge_zero_wp_pmd_locked(struct vm_fault *vmf,
>>> + unsigned long haddr,
>>> + struct folio *folio)
>>> +{
>>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
>>> + vm_fault_t ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + ret = check_stable_address_space(vma->vm_mm);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + goto out;
>>> + map_pmd_thp(folio, vmf, vma, haddr, NULL);
>>> +out:
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static vm_fault_t do_huge_zero_wp_pmd(struct vm_fault *vmf, unsigned long
>>> haddr)
>>> +{
>>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
>>> + gfp_t gfp = vma_thp_gfp_mask(vma);
>>> + struct mmu_notifier_range range;
>>> + struct folio *folio = NULL;
>>> + vm_fault_t ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + ret = thp_fault_alloc(gfp, HPAGE_PMD_ORDER, vma, haddr, &folio,
>>> + vmf->address);
>> Just checking: the PTE table was already allocated during the read fault, right?
>> So we don't have to allocate it here.
>
> Correct, that happens in set_huge_zero_folio(). Thanks for checking.
>
>>
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + mmu_notifier_range_init(&range, MMU_NOTIFY_CLEAR, 0, vma->vm_mm, haddr,
>>> + haddr + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);
>>> + mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(&range);
>>> + vmf->ptl = pmd_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd);
>>> + if (unlikely(!pmd_same(pmdp_get(vmf->pmd), vmf->orig_pmd)))
>>> + goto unlock;
>>> + ret = do_huge_zero_wp_pmd_locked(vmf, haddr, folio);
>>> + if (!ret)
>>> + __thp_fault_success_stats(vma, HPAGE_PMD_ORDER);
>>> +unlock:
>>> + spin_unlock(vmf->ptl);
>>> + mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(&range);
>> I'll confess I don't understand all the mmu notifier rules.
>
> I confess the same :)
>
>> But the doc at
>> Documentation/mm/mmu_notifier.rst implies that the notification must be done
>> while holding the PTL. Although that's not how wp_page_copy(). Are you confident
>> what you have done is correct?
>
> Everywhere else, invalidate_range_end() is getting called after dropping the lock,
> one reason is that it has a might_sleep(), and therefore we cannot call it while
> holding a spinlock. I still don't know what exactly these calls mean...but I think
> what I have done is correct.
High level; they are notifying secondary MMUs (e.g. IOMMU) of a change so the
tables of those secondary MMUs can be kept in sync. I don't understand all the
ordering requirement details though.
I think what you have is probably correct, would be good for someone that knows
what they are talking about to confirm though :)
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ryan
>>
>>> +out:
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> vm_fault_t do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>> {
>>> const bool unshare = vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_UNSHARE;
>>> @@ -1588,8 +1640,15 @@ vm_fault_t do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>> vmf->ptl = pmd_lockptr(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd);
>>> VM_BUG_ON_VMA(!vma->anon_vma, vma);
>>> - if (is_huge_zero_pmd(orig_pmd))
>>> + if (is_huge_zero_pmd(orig_pmd)) {
>>> + vm_fault_t ret = do_huge_zero_wp_pmd(vmf, haddr);
>>> +
>>> + if (!(ret & VM_FAULT_FALLBACK))
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Fallback to splitting PMD if THP cannot be allocated */
>>> goto fallback;
>>> + }
>>> spin_lock(vmf->ptl);
>>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
>>> index 3c01d68065be..c081a25f5173 100644
>>> --- a/mm/memory.c
>>> +++ b/mm/memory.c
>>> @@ -5409,9 +5409,10 @@ static inline vm_fault_t wp_huge_pmd(struct vm_fault
>>> *vmf)
>>> if (vma_is_anonymous(vma)) {
>>> if (likely(!unshare) &&
>>> userfaultfd_huge_pmd_wp(vma, vmf->orig_pmd)) {
>>> - if (userfaultfd_wp_async(vmf->vma))
>>> + if (!userfaultfd_wp_async(vmf->vma))
>>> + return handle_userfault(vmf, VM_UFFD_WP);
>>> + if (!is_huge_zero_pmd(vmf->orig_pmd))
>>> goto split;
>>> - return handle_userfault(vmf, VM_UFFD_WP);
>>> }
>>> return do_huge_pmd_wp_page(vmf);
>>> }
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list