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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE8E4D7495A for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 06:18:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 09F036B008A; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 01:18:37 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 076D06B008C; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 01:18:37 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id EEF916B0092; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 01:18:36 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9DDA6B008A for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 01:18:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748C01A0424 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 06:18:36 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 84235216632.09.D09E865 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [172.105.4.254]) by imf28.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE32DC000C for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 06:18:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf28.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=gqgGZDtI; spf=pass (imf28.hostedemail.com: domain of david@kernel.org designates 172.105.4.254 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=kernel.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1766125114; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=IfaVF9h7+k3nDM/rgQDYjbWkYDW+uVQm3XtwB/toh3w=; b=Wx2MsqksIeqB3fDAhg9+F3WVlv8GnolXvIUA4+rsFdMo4Q3W8CD2DVu4US1FVJdPOUNWAm 9+S9Fs1spRnHomC4vsmKskVNY/U1uqxKaAfs+O7tPEN29UOM0PPYvR3v0fcZoRoWLKf+ox D/Xq2l6upKr0IJrDdDCz8cWAHNhhxCg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf28.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=gqgGZDtI; spf=pass (imf28.hostedemail.com: domain of david@kernel.org designates 172.105.4.254 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1766125114; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=LJu//yAC8L+XpeN0rlw4ED8y0MTeGk0LjYL7EsanZAYsVaGwbEfxOmeu7ht5sO+5HL7G6P 8AcIuoFsyTYm1n7pWJoOOa0WW9NrTkmgP3m6DGrys8H8K1JlRT/LKk53Q7d3Bkv4n4wBTG Q5hHzBP5myPSAonICNpKizLxfaCNm3w= Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E60860008; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 06:18:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 32648C4CEF1; Fri, 19 Dec 2025 06:18:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1766125113; bh=xMlIHS8RXqYBLJVVEzUZMFwENBOT//REo0D9YNRvPpU=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=gqgGZDtI1zhIVleIDAu0xskWmE2Fgbb2lH2Cz0pdmMBcNwjk/LP2OLp6DR8sE/ncy JtEBvuEw8OFnUCfpw+z7srVGdjs1qv3OQ1JkobH4OzPRQfbisNpbB05U3+sd8bOwI/ JcuuwoAMEzD3Svwp/O/KZ1rxsdZkIWAWzS4W5RQ+QwBUf6+rh5TEC6X2ivhlRod2cy tWyT+yEe0d+uJ+WHQo415+9ft7U2x7LtPu22tFVp/1GYVihMOWQlepnAPcCAsJM70e NOxy3x+GSmfieI7dfWpIOeUmfBv4H7puXAAU4YwJiJHg0gXzyKhS0Z7zqTCKPAtruT ED/lw+zbKuf1w== Message-ID: <1b87adbb-a34d-4c7e-98d4-664ccf71fc60@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 07:18:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/28] mm: migrate: prevent memory cgroup release in folio_migrate_mapping() To: Harry Yoo , Qi Zheng Cc: hannes@cmpxchg.org, hughd@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, ziy@nvidia.com, imran.f.khan@oracle.com, kamalesh.babulal@oracle.com, axelrasmussen@google.com, yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com, chenridong@huaweicloud.com, mkoutny@suse.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hamzamahfooz@linux.microsoft.com, apais@linux.microsoft.com, lance.yang@linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Muchun Song , Qi Zheng References: <1554459c705a46324b83799ede617b670b9e22fb.1765956025.git.zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com> <3a6ab69e-a2cc-4c61-9de1-9b0958c72dda@kernel.org> <02c3be32-4826-408d-8b96-1db51dcababf@linux.dev> <4effa243-bae3-45e4-8662-dca86a7e5d12@linux.dev> <11a60eba-3447-47de-9d59-af5842f5dc5e@kernel.org> <3c32d80a-ba0e-4ed2-87ae-fb80fc3374f7@linux.dev> <49341ca3-1fc9-43d9-abbd-ecaabdda6ce0@kernel.org> From: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Stat-Signature: 9664e3z3os97nkryhhkf55sfn5w5ptzc X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: CE32DC000C X-HE-Tag: 1766125114-375107 X-HE-Meta: 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 FTbOjXz9 VQPZu7ee3K/butTyr0CoFKsbEM4rE6BCYG8S7h/QyT++4TYf3jSrEASTmZKWI+dAAv3F8bui1JlZko1PcFCqH9FAR++2EMMK5a6nJTAf7Y6rW8JrmgIcY2f2diumv7RRrcr9ffwUjiTjYa8Xd1p1y6Y1Ju6sfMvHY9lm0VNqntAdiZTYedvf2TPYgGohWWH5wICfhkve3cYaJDgw2uSUohpW8b1HMhf9FtTiUKvXz6dF5YOiRo7Mb9CM2E/BGerHIx9Zc3teoCKjnLFVpXA/LPdp2/7NyjPDgbmaB1FTAZsaNngNu28wJXzmVfCccJGQjTUzZUYQfSqCIJ/tTmz97tLA9CdCegcxHvIgbEJDvLOaORdcpBnCOBGEjVQ6otbwrpq1Z 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 12/19/25 05:12, Harry Yoo wrote: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 09:16:11PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: >> >> >> On 12/18/25 9:04 PM, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: >>> On 12/18/25 14:00, Qi Zheng wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 12/18/25 7:56 PM, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: >>>>> On 12/18/25 12:40, Qi Zheng wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12/18/25 5:43 PM, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/18/25 10:36, Qi Zheng wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 12/18/25 5:09 PM, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 12/17/25 08:27, Qi Zheng wrote: >>>>>>>>>> From: Muchun Song >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In the near future, a folio will no longer pin its corresponding >>>>>>>>>> memory cgroup. To ensure safety, it will only be appropriate to >>>>>>>>>> hold the rcu read lock or acquire a reference to the memory cgroup >>>>>>>>>> returned by folio_memcg(), thereby >>>>>>>>>> preventing it from being released. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In the current patch, the rcu read lock is employed to safeguard >>>>>>>>>> against the release of the memory cgroup in >>>>>>>>>> folio_migrate_mapping(). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We usually avoid talking about "patches". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Got it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In __folio_migrate_mapping(), the rcu read lock ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Will do. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This serves as a preparatory measure for the reparenting of the >>>>>>>>>> LRU pages. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng >>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Harry Yoo >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>      mm/migrate.c | 2 ++ >>>>>>>>>>      1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c >>>>>>>>>> index 5169f9717f606..8bcd588c083ca 100644 >>>>>>>>>> --- a/mm/migrate.c >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/mm/migrate.c >>>>>>>>>> @@ -671,6 +671,7 @@ static int __folio_migrate_mapping(struct >>>>>>>>>> address_space *mapping, >>>>>>>>>>              struct lruvec *old_lruvec, *new_lruvec; >>>>>>>>>>              struct mem_cgroup *memcg; >>>>>>>>>> +        rcu_read_lock(); >>>>>>>>>>              memcg = folio_memcg(folio); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In general, LGTM >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I wonder, though, whether we should embed that in the ABI. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Like "lock RCU and get the memcg" in one operation, to the "return >>>>>>>>> memcg >>>>>>>>> and unock rcu" in another operation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Do you mean adding a helper function like >>>>>>>> get_mem_cgroup_from_folio()? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Right, something like >>>>>>> >>>>>>> memcg = folio_memcg_begin(folio); >>>>>>> folio_memcg_end(memcg); >>>>>> >>>>>> For some longer or might-sleep critical sections (such as those pointed >>>>>> by Johannes), perhaps it can be defined like this: >>>>>> >>>>>> struct mem_cgroup *folio_memcg_begin(struct folio *folio) >>>>>> { >>>>>>      return get_mem_cgroup_from_folio(folio); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> void folio_memcg_end(struct mem_cgroup *memcg) >>>>>> { >>>>>>      mem_cgroup_put(memcg); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> But for some short critical sections, using RCU lock directly might >>>>>> be the most convention option? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then put the rcu read locking in there instead? >>>> >>>> So for some longer or might-sleep critical sections, using: >>>> >>>> memcg = folio_memcg_begin(folio); >>>> do_some_thing(memcg); >>>> folio_memcg_end(folio); >>>> >>>> for some short critical sections, using: >>>> >>>> rcu_read_lock(); >>>> memcg = folio_memcg(folio); >>>> do_some_thing(memcg); >>>> rcu_read_unlock(); >>>> >>>> Right? >>> >>> What I mean is: >>> >>> memcg = folio_memcg_begin(folio); >>> do_some_thing(memcg); >>> folio_memcg_end(folio); >>> >>> but do the rcu_read_lock() in folio_memcg_begin() and the >>> rcu_read_unlock() in folio_memcg_end(). >>> >>> You could also have (expensive) variants, as you describe, that mess >>> with getting/dopping the memcg. >> >> Or simple use folio_memcg_begin(memcg)/folio_memcg_end(memcg) in all cases. >> >> Or add a parameter to them: >> >> struct mem_cgroup *folio_memcg_begin(struct folio *folio, bool get_refcnt) >> { >> struct mem_cgroup *memcg; >> >> if (get_refcnt) >> memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_folio(folio); >> else { >> rcu_read_lock(); >> memcg = folio_memcg(folio); >> } >> >> return memcg; >> } >> >> void folio_memcg_end(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, bool get_refcnt) >> { >> if (get_refcnt) >> mem_cgroup_put(memcg); >> else >> rcu_read_unlock(); >> } > > I would like to vote for open coding as we do now, because I think hiding > the RCU lock / refcount acquisition into a less obvious API doesn't make > it more readable. I wouldn't do it in an API as proposed above. I prefer to not have magical RCU locking in every caller. Easy to get wrong. See how we did something similar in the pte_*map*() vs. pte_unmap() API, without requiring all callers to open-code this. -- Cheers David