[PATCH V2] arm64: properly define SOFT_DIRTY functionality
Nico Pache
npache at redhat.com
Tue Jul 4 07:49:06 PDT 2023
Hi Mark,
On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 10:19 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 09:36:33AM -0400, Nico Pache wrote:
> > ARM64 has a soft-dirty bit (software dirty) but never properly defines
> > CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SOFT_DIRTY or its necessary functions. This patch
> > introduces the ability to set/clear the soft dirty bit in a similar
> > manner as the other arches that utilize it.
>
> Anshuman already explained that this is not correct -- to enable
> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SOFT_DIRTY, you need *another* PTE bit. Please don't send
> another version following this approach.
>
> Despite its name, pte_sw_dirty() has nothing to do with
> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SOFT_DIRTY. We have pte_hw_dirty() and pte_sw_dirty() because
> with Hardware Dirty bit management the HW dirty bit is *also* the write
> permission bit, and to have a dirty non-writeable PTE state we have to use a SW
> bit, which is what pte_sw_dirty() handles. Both pte_hw_dirty() and
> pte_sw_dirty() comprise the regular dirty state.
>
> That's *very* different from CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SOFT_DIRTY, which is about having
> a *separate* software dirty state that can be used for longer-term dirty
> tracking (whether the page was last touched since some management SW
> manipulated the page).
>
> > However, we must be careful... there are cases where the DBM bit is not
> > available and the software dirty bit plays a essential role in determining
> > whether or not a page is dirty. In these cases we must not allow the
> > user to clear the software dirty bit. We can check for these cases by
> > utilizing the arch_has_hw_pte_young() function which tests the availability
> > of DBM.
>
> Regardless of the above, this doesn't seem to have been thought through. why
> would it be ok for this to work or not work dependent on DBM?
It was from my understanding of both reading the code, and the
following chart that the PTE_DIRTY bit was only used in the absence of
the DBM bit to determine the dirty state of a page.
/*
* PTE bits configuration in the presence of hardware Dirty Bit Management
* (PTE_WRITE == PTE_DBM):
*
* Dirty Writable | PTE_RDONLY PTE_WRITE PTE_DIRTY (sw)
* 0 0 | 1 0 0
* 0 1 | 1 1 0
* 1 0 | 1 0 1
* 1 1 | 0 1 x
*
* When hardware DBM is not present, the sofware PTE_DIRTY bit is updated via
* the page fault mechanism. Checking the dirty status of a pte becomes:
*
* PTE_DIRTY || (PTE_WRITE && !PTE_RDONLY)
*/
So from my understanding it seems that when DBM is present, it acts as
the PTE_WRITE bit, and the AF bit is the HW dirty bit. This gives me
the impression that the PTE_DIRTY bit is redundant; however, When DBM
is not present PTE_DIRTY becomes crucial in determining the dirty
state.
-- Nico
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual at arm.com>
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
> > Cc: David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com>
> > Cc: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer at linux.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Liu Shixin <liushixin2 at huawei.com>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will at kernel.org>
> > Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao at google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache at redhat.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 104 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > index 7856c3a3e35a..6ea73b8148c5 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > @@ -173,6 +173,7 @@ config ARM64
> > select HAVE_ARCH_PREL32_RELOCATIONS
> > select HAVE_ARCH_RANDOMIZE_KSTACK_OFFSET
> > select HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER
> > + select HAVE_ARCH_SOFT_DIRTY
> > select HAVE_ARCH_STACKLEAK
> > select HAVE_ARCH_THREAD_STRUCT_WHITELIST
> > select HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> > index 0bd18de9fd97..c4970c9ed114 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> > @@ -51,6 +51,20 @@ static inline bool arch_thp_swp_supported(void)
> > }
> > #define arch_thp_swp_supported arch_thp_swp_supported
> >
> > +/*
> > + * On arm64 without hardware Access Flag, copying from user will fail because
> > + * the pte is old and cannot be marked young. So we always end up with zeroed
> > + * page after fork() + CoW for pfn mappings. We don't always have a
> > + * hardware-managed access flag on arm64.
> > + */
> > +#define arch_has_hw_pte_young cpu_has_hw_af
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Experimentally, it's cheap to set the access flag in hardware and we
> > + * benefit from prefaulting mappings as 'old' to start with.
> > + */
> > +#define arch_wants_old_prefaulted_pte cpu_has_hw_af
> > +
> > /*
> > * Outside of a few very special situations (e.g. hibernation), we always
> > * use broadcast TLB invalidation instructions, therefore a spurious page
> > @@ -121,8 +135,9 @@ static inline pteval_t __phys_to_pte_val(phys_addr_t phys)
> > })
> >
> > #define pte_hw_dirty(pte) (pte_write(pte) && !(pte_val(pte) & PTE_RDONLY))
> > -#define pte_sw_dirty(pte) (!!(pte_val(pte) & PTE_DIRTY))
> > -#define pte_dirty(pte) (pte_sw_dirty(pte) || pte_hw_dirty(pte))
> > +#define pte_soft_dirty(pte) (!!(pte_val(pte) & PTE_DIRTY))
> > +#define pte_dirty(pte) (pte_soft_dirty(pte) || pte_hw_dirty(pte))
> > +#define pte_swp_soft_dirty(pte) pte_soft_dirty(pte)
> >
> > #define pte_valid(pte) (!!(pte_val(pte) & PTE_VALID))
> > /*
> > @@ -189,7 +204,8 @@ static inline pte_t pte_mkwrite(pte_t pte)
> >
> > static inline pte_t pte_mkclean(pte_t pte)
> > {
> > - pte = clear_pte_bit(pte, __pgprot(PTE_DIRTY));
> > + if (!arch_has_hw_pte_young())
> > + pte = clear_pte_bit(pte, __pgprot(PTE_DIRTY));
> > pte = set_pte_bit(pte, __pgprot(PTE_RDONLY));
> >
> > return pte;
> > @@ -1077,25 +1093,83 @@ static inline void update_mmu_cache(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > #define phys_to_ttbr(addr) (addr)
> > #endif
> >
> > -/*
> > - * On arm64 without hardware Access Flag, copying from user will fail because
> > - * the pte is old and cannot be marked young. So we always end up with zeroed
> > - * page after fork() + CoW for pfn mappings. We don't always have a
> > - * hardware-managed access flag on arm64.
> > - */
> > -#define arch_has_hw_pte_young cpu_has_hw_af
> > +static inline bool pud_sect_supported(void)
> > +{
> > + return PAGE_SIZE == SZ_4K;
> > +}
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_HW_AFDBM
> > /*
> > - * Experimentally, it's cheap to set the access flag in hardware and we
> > - * benefit from prefaulting mappings as 'old' to start with.
> > + * if we have the DBM bit we can utilize the software dirty bit as
> > + * a mechanism to introduce the soft_dirty functionality; however, without
> > + * it this bit is crucial to determining if a entry is dirty and we cannot
> > + * clear it via software. DBM can also be disabled or broken on some early
> > + * armv8 devices, so check its availability before modifying it.
> > */
> > -#define arch_wants_old_prefaulted_pte cpu_has_hw_af
> > +static inline pte_t pte_clear_soft_dirty(pte_t pte)
> > +{
> > + if (!arch_has_hw_pte_young())
> > + return pte;
> >
> > -static inline bool pud_sect_supported(void)
> > + return clear_pte_bit(pte, __pgprot(PTE_DIRTY));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline pte_t pte_mksoft_dirty(pte_t pte)
> > {
> > - return PAGE_SIZE == SZ_4K;
> > + if (!arch_has_hw_pte_young())
> > + return pte;
> > +
> > + return set_pte_bit(pte, __pgprot(PTE_DIRTY));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline pte_t pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pte_t pte)
> > +{
> > + if (!arch_has_hw_pte_young())
> > + return pte;
> > +
> > + return clear_pte_bit(pte, __pgprot(PTE_DIRTY));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline pte_t pte_swp_mksoft_dirty(pte_t pte)
> > +{
> > + if (!arch_has_hw_pte_young())
> > + return pte;
> > +
> > + return set_pte_bit(pte, __pgprot(PTE_DIRTY));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int pmd_soft_dirty(pmd_t pmd)
> > +{
> > + return pte_soft_dirty(pmd_pte(pmd));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline pmd_t pmd_clear_soft_dirty(pmd_t pmd)
> > +{
> > + return pte_pmd(pte_clear_soft_dirty(pmd_pte(pmd)));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline pmd_t pmd_mksoft_dirty(pmd_t pmd)
> > +{
> > + return pte_pmd(pte_mksoft_dirty(pmd_pte(pmd)));
> > }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_THP_MIGRATION
> > +static inline int pmd_swp_soft_dirty(pmd_t pmd)
> > +{
> > + return pmd_soft_dirty(pmd);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline pmd_t pmd_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pmd_t pmd)
> > +{
> > + return pmd_clear_soft_dirty(pmd);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline pmd_t pmd_swp_mksoft_dirty(pmd_t pmd)
> > +{
> > + return pmd_mksoft_dirty(pmd);
> > +}
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_THP_MIGRATION */
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_ARM64_HW_AFDBM */
> >
> > #define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_MODIFY_PROT_TRANSACTION
> > #define ptep_modify_prot_start ptep_modify_prot_start
> > --
> > 2.41.0
> >
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list