From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f197.google.com (mail-wr0-f197.google.com [209.85.128.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CECC6B0007 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:20:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-f197.google.com with SMTP id v11so8456902wri.13 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com. [148.163.158.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j62si1086127edd.49.2018.04.10.09.20.40 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:20:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w3AGHoL9081408 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:20:39 -0400 Received: from e06smtp14.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp14.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.110]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2h90hkrked-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA256 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:20:39 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp14.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 17:20:35 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 17/24] mm: Protect mm_rb tree with a rwlock References: <1520963994-28477-1-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1520963994-28477-18-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> From: Laurent Dufour Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 18:20:25 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <8191409a-d7aa-6476-6aa9-1d1c4dced788@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: David Rientjes Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill@shutemov.name, ak@linux.intel.com, mhocko@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net, jack@suse.cz, Matthew Wilcox , benh@kernel.crashing.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , hpa@zytor.com, Will Deacon , Sergey Senozhatsky , Andrea Arcangeli , Alexei Starovoitov , kemi.wang@intel.com, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, Daniel Jordan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, Tim Chen , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org On 03/04/2018 02:11, David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Laurent Dufour wrote: > >> This change is inspired by the Peter's proposal patch [1] which was >> protecting the VMA using SRCU. Unfortunately, SRCU is not scaling well in >> that particular case, and it is introducing major performance degradation >> due to excessive scheduling operations. >> >> To allow access to the mm_rb tree without grabbing the mmap_sem, this patch >> is protecting it access using a rwlock. As the mm_rb tree is a O(log n) >> search it is safe to protect it using such a lock. The VMA cache is not >> protected by the new rwlock and it should not be used without holding the >> mmap_sem. >> >> To allow the picked VMA structure to be used once the rwlock is released, a >> use count is added to the VMA structure. When the VMA is allocated it is >> set to 1. Each time the VMA is picked with the rwlock held its use count >> is incremented. Each time the VMA is released it is decremented. When the >> use count hits zero, this means that the VMA is no more used and should be >> freed. >> >> This patch is preparing for 2 kind of VMA access : >> - as usual, under the control of the mmap_sem, >> - without holding the mmap_sem for the speculative page fault handler. >> >> Access done under the control the mmap_sem doesn't require to grab the >> rwlock to protect read access to the mm_rb tree, but access in write must >> be done under the protection of the rwlock too. This affects inserting and >> removing of elements in the RB tree. >> >> The patch is introducing 2 new functions: >> - vma_get() to find a VMA based on an address by holding the new rwlock. >> - vma_put() to release the VMA when its no more used. >> These services are designed to be used when access are made to the RB tree >> without holding the mmap_sem. >> >> When a VMA is removed from the RB tree, its vma->vm_rb field is cleared and >> we rely on the WMB done when releasing the rwlock to serialize the write >> with the RMB done in a later patch to check for the VMA's validity. >> >> When free_vma is called, the file associated with the VMA is closed >> immediately, but the policy and the file structure remained in used until >> the VMA's use count reach 0, which may happens later when exiting an >> in progress speculative page fault. >> >> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5108281/ >> >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) >> Cc: Matthew Wilcox >> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour > > Can __free_vma() be generalized for mm/nommu.c's delete_vma() and > do_mmap()? Good question ! I guess if there is no mmu, there is no page fault, so no speculative page fault and this patch is clearly required by the speculative page fault handler. By the I should probably make CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT dependent on CONFIG_MMU. This being said, if your idea is to extend the mm_rb tree rwlocking to the nommu case, then this is another story, and I wondering if there is a real need in such case. But I've to admit I'm not so familliar with kernel built for mmuless systems. Am I missing something ? Thanks, Laurent.