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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11F47C433E6 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF7F2098B for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="Fczk9IkS" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org ABF7F2098B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=de.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1A9786B0002; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:53:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 132576B0003; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:53:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id F19136B0005; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:53:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0123.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.123]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6EAF6B0002 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:53:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin26.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F4A0180AD811 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:43 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77210704326.26.hen82_0e077aa2708f Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin26.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F6E91804B654 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:43 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: hen82_0e077aa2708f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 8596 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by imf28.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07VBl3E9112787; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:53:41 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=dWs1aPRnbLqL7dCuJTLoW8QWOr4jUzutJnEADk/bUYg=; b=Fczk9IkS8Y0OufXLWLcK5iaQTBa5nwAvb4rUiEBtaoUFAnxUlYHyk0BjQooYi6dbi3sE nS7j45CnMsMSIk+dr6v/RNBbT/VM0IoDbQh4gcY/HQMFlKhC2d5nwnxDaACsdevTwL3Z OMlcuk/hzWZWjTruTDj669hgTdIkD1um7nVNJjZ5SekUaw6Y7XvRp5QOdjONT0gAhrCf L8p0B3tGVhGQhjh6F6d72XgXU/VI4+JOZFLgj5tu6Tos0/reVJJo91qgDAt6IQzjMtN3 w108LpExO+iZDoxogncWjACxZD7E5K+U3epgOWAKlG1tSRbb/tT0ZHJRPnvIAv51h9/1 /Q== Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3390mw030g-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:53:41 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07VBlnLg009755; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:40 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.196]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 337en823vd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:39 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (mk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 07VBrbAd31523170 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:37 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30ABB4203F; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9962242041; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc7455500831.ibm.com (unknown [9.145.20.219]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:53:36 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] mm/gup: fix gup_fast with dynamic page table folding To: Gerald Schaefer , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm , LKML , Vasily Gorbik , Alexander Gordeev , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , Claudio Imbrenda References: <20200828140314.8556-1-gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com> From: Christian Borntraeger Autocrypt: addr=borntraeger@de.ibm.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsFNBE6cPPgBEAC2VpALY0UJjGmgAmavkL/iAdqul2/F9ONz42K6NrwmT+SI9CylKHIX+fdf J34pLNJDmDVEdeb+brtpwC9JEZOLVE0nb+SR83CsAINJYKG3V1b3Kfs0hydseYKsBYqJTN2j CmUXDYq9J7uOyQQ7TNVoQejmpp5ifR4EzwIFfmYDekxRVZDJygD0wL/EzUr8Je3/j548NLyL 4Uhv6CIPf3TY3/aLVKXdxz/ntbLgMcfZsDoHgDk3lY3r1iwbWwEM2+eYRdSZaR4VD+JRD7p8 0FBadNwWnBce1fmQp3EklodGi5y7TNZ/CKdJ+jRPAAnw7SINhSd7PhJMruDAJaUlbYaIm23A +82g+IGe4z9tRGQ9TAflezVMhT5J3ccu6cpIjjvwDlbxucSmtVi5VtPAMTLmfjYp7VY2Tgr+ T92v7+V96jAfE3Zy2nq52e8RDdUo/F6faxcumdl+aLhhKLXgrozpoe2nL0Nyc2uqFjkjwXXI OBQiaqGeWtxeKJP+O8MIpjyGuHUGzvjNx5S/592TQO3phpT5IFWfMgbu4OreZ9yekDhf7Cvn /fkYsiLDz9W6Clihd/xlpm79+jlhm4E3xBPiQOPCZowmHjx57mXVAypOP2Eu+i2nyQrkapaY IdisDQfWPdNeHNOiPnPS3+GhVlPcqSJAIWnuO7Ofw1ZVOyg/jwARAQABzUNDaHJpc3RpYW4g Qm9ybnRyYWVnZXIgKDJuZCBJQk0gYWRkcmVzcykgPGJvcm50cmFlZ2VyQGxpbnV4LmlibS5j b20+wsF5BBMBAgAjBQJdP/hMAhsDBwsJCAcDAgEGFQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQEXu8 gLWmHHy/pA/+JHjpEnd01A0CCyfVnb5fmcOlQ0LdmoKWLWPvU840q65HycCBFTt6V62cDljB kXFFxMNA4y/2wqU0H5/CiL963y3gWIiJsZa4ent+KrHl5GK1nIgbbesfJyA7JqlB0w/E/SuY NRQwIWOo/uEvOgXnk/7+rtvBzNaPGoGiiV1LZzeaxBVWrqLtmdi1iulW/0X/AlQPuF9dD1Px hx+0mPjZ8ClLpdSp5d0yfpwgHtM1B7KMuQPQZGFKMXXTUd3ceBUGGczsgIMipZWJukqMJiJj QIMH0IN7XYErEnhf0GCxJ3xAn/J7iFpPFv8sFZTvukntJXSUssONnwiKuld6ttUaFhSuSoQg OFYR5v7pOfinM0FcScPKTkrRsB5iUvpdthLq5qgwdQjmyINt3cb+5aSvBX2nNN135oGOtlb5 tf4dh00kUR8XFHRrFxXx4Dbaw4PKgV3QLIHKEENlqnthH5t0tahDygQPnSucuXbVQEcDZaL9 WgJqlRAAj0pG8M6JNU5+2ftTFXoTcoIUbb0KTOibaO9zHVeGegwAvPLLNlKHiHXcgLX1tkjC DrvE2Z0e2/4q7wgZgn1kbvz7ZHQZB76OM2mjkFu7QNHlRJ2VXJA8tMXyTgBX6kq1cYMmd/Hl OhFrAU3QO1SjCsXA2CDk9MM1471mYB3CTXQuKzXckJnxHkHOwU0ETpw8+AEQAJjyNXvMQdJN t07BIPDtbAQk15FfB0hKuyZVs+0lsjPKBZCamAAexNRk11eVGXK/YrqwjChkk60rt3q5i42u PpNMO9aS8cLPOfVft89Y654Qd3Rs1WRFIQq9xLjdLfHh0i0jMq5Ty+aiddSXpZ7oU6E+ud+X Czs3k5RAnOdW6eV3+v10sUjEGiFNZwzN9Udd6PfKET0J70qjnpY3NuWn5Sp1ZEn6lkq2Zm+G 9G3FlBRVClT30OWeiRHCYB6e6j1x1u/rSU4JiNYjPwSJA8EPKnt1s/Eeq37qXXvk+9DYiHdT PcOa3aNCSbIygD3jyjkg6EV9ZLHibE2R/PMMid9FrqhKh/cwcYn9FrT0FE48/2IBW5mfDpAd YvpawQlRz3XJr2rYZJwMUm1y+49+1ZmDclaF3s9dcz2JvuywNq78z/VsUfGz4Sbxy4ShpNpG REojRcz/xOK+FqNuBk+HoWKw6OxgRzfNleDvScVmbY6cQQZfGx/T7xlgZjl5Mu/2z+ofeoxb vWWM1YCJAT91GFvj29Wvm8OAPN/+SJj8LQazd9uGzVMTz6lFjVtH7YkeW/NZrP6znAwv5P1a DdQfiB5F63AX++NlTiyA+GD/ggfRl68LheSskOcxDwgI5TqmaKtX1/8RkrLpnzO3evzkfJb1 D5qh3wM1t7PZ+JWTluSX8W25ABEBAAHCwV8EGAECAAkFAk6cPPgCGwwACgkQEXu8gLWmHHz8 2w//VjRlX+tKF3szc0lQi4X0t+pf88uIsvR/a1GRZpppQbn1jgE44hgF559K6/yYemcvTR7r 6Xt7cjWGS4wfaR0+pkWV+2dbw8Xi4DI07/fN00NoVEpYUUnOnupBgychtVpxkGqsplJZQpng v6fauZtyEcUK3dLJH3TdVQDLbUcL4qZpzHbsuUnTWsmNmG4Vi0NsEt1xyd/Wuw+0kM/oFEH1 4BN6X9xZcG8GYUbVUd8+bmio8ao8m0tzo4pseDZFo4ncDmlFWU6hHnAVfkAs4tqA6/fl7RLN JuWBiOL/mP5B6HDQT9JsnaRdzqF73FnU2+WrZPjinHPLeE74istVgjbowvsgUqtzjPIG5pOj cAsKoR0M1womzJVRfYauWhYiW/KeECklci4TPBDNx7YhahSUlexfoftltJA8swRshNA/M90/ i9zDo9ySSZHwsGxG06ZOH5/MzG6HpLja7g8NTgA0TD5YaFm/oOnsQVsf2DeAGPS2xNirmknD jaqYefx7yQ7FJXXETd2uVURiDeNEFhVZWb5CiBJM5c6qQMhmkS4VyT7/+raaEGgkEKEgHOWf ZDP8BHfXtszHqI3Fo1F4IKFo/AP8GOFFxMRgbvlAs8z/+rEEaQYjxYJqj08raw6P4LFBqozr nS4h0HDFPrrp1C2EMVYIQrMokWvlFZbCpsdYbBI= Message-ID: <9071c9fa-ba6a-90dc-2d7a-8b155141d890@de.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:53:36 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 In-Reply-To: <20200828140314.8556-1-gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235,18.0.687 definitions=2020-08-31_04:2020-08-31,2020-08-31 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1011 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2008310062 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5F6E91804B654 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 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: On 28.08.20 16:03, Gerald Schaefer wrote: [...] > We came up with two possible fix-ups, both will introduce some gup-specific > helper functions, which will have no effect on other archs than s390. > > Patch 1 is the solution that has already been discussed in > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190418100218.0a4afd51@mschwideX1 > It will additionally pass along pXd pointers in gup_pXd_range, and > also introduce pXd_offset_orig for s390, which takes an additional > pXd entry value parameter. This allows correctly returning / incrementing > pointers while still preseving the READ_ONCE logic for gup_fast. > > Patch 2 would instead introduce new gup_pXd_addr_end helpers, which take > an additional pXd entry value parameter, that can be used on s390 > to determine the correct page table level and return corresponding > end / boundary. With that, the pointer iteration will always > happen in gup_pgd_range. > > Comments / preferences are welcome. As a last resort, we might also > revert back to the s390-specific gup_fast code, if none of the options > are agreeable. given that this is a data integrity issue, I think it would be good to have some feedback soon if option 1 or option 2 would be acceptable from a common code perspective. Andrew, who of the mm people would be the right one to decide?