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]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B886C77B75 for ; Tue, 2 May 2023 23:05:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9D6546B0071; Tue, 2 May 2023 19:05:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 986076B0072; Tue, 2 May 2023 19:05:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 874F56B0081; Tue, 2 May 2023 19:05:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from mail-yb1-f176.google.com (mail-yb1-f176.google.com [209.85.219.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 624816B0071 for ; Tue, 2 May 2023 19:05:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yb1-f176.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-b9d9dad9edfso5687738276.2 for ; Tue, 02 May 2023 16:05:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20221208; t=1683068711; x=1685660711; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=TUKDQYPWqgHcO1XQ1Dc3esJ/u5Dg98+S6HrK92DBIP4=; b=irnUbCMInaRspFhs3sQBArEm1VLRoaQ9dsFTug/GipTofQOyfj68J22hJg25cBpCFa neyxbrNX9aQ9z5xXk15pWRUaUwR+5QgJM8TqriRmL8ztfmvqQCN4MiiWE1B0wFHGiiHx 4GM4VR0O4EVzRz0QvQBpwHUEvFYxjOBbz5Hcn165JzmykAzr96NDzGbVwj/GDj8htxHG r8qhF1b9SyF6Tuk3/OUl6CvUBQYyDi5DzhjLXkL+YkHMWIjVDlJ1JSl5Ewmicn8HBlTm CjRhSDMWUV8w9jW9ymx/+nARIPsvY6dtlPmlqwsOWMivijJCRtT8eYEiUldUJT2XQDZW GYrA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683068711; x=1685660711; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TUKDQYPWqgHcO1XQ1Dc3esJ/u5Dg98+S6HrK92DBIP4=; b=LGa8Sg9/lr0vvKgg4QQg+O92Q9QZAWOdzTmAlqpchr9FHoMqo5apSFapxzGJFjKXB1 5YrjzneNtgxWXm0SjvMERI1NLumwCQb768IeNj/AoIr77dxBhhBZ6synL75c9CD3q26q Rw16SkiHUXrOCS0/rgqIOnbiIG3B7daDE6IKfX2an6y8rBpYCg+2eihNe+mutlZeAAou LPun52xAjykBo1I+m+Fd7iCAyV1mkv0NSC0lRPE4vtkar0x6uLZ1jzh+fe0p1aBfsiwe mdkggPL060gQMez5Aef3PqhcyI7ZEsA17l8wY0WMeefG5sd2IZUB2BLrR4zSmZLWnOsp 0x3g== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDy8m+rMHZCF09rzxG7N2KrQ+F3R9/+WwJaRFCdd36c1WokEFdNF 5TdA/YxF21SvEO8LlVKzJqRgcBmsU5X8dXMSVgsZ1A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7jsYrkoiEy4cySESG4HDKDzMYd6UFgrTHZJlXYGIrBwQiXUk/zzGx2KyuHlp7BIdqF6rvzDKznYWKiH5AXqvU= X-Received: by 2002:a25:e792:0:b0:b9d:8613:6936 with SMTP id e140-20020a25e792000000b00b9d86136936mr14622784ybh.50.1683068710692; Tue, 02 May 2023 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230501175025.36233-1-surenb@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Suren Baghdasaryan Date: Tue, 2 May 2023 16:04:59 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm: handle swap page faults under VMA lock if page is uncontended To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@suse.com, josef@toxicpanda.com, jack@suse.cz, ldufour@linux.ibm.com, laurent.dufour@fr.ibm.com, michel@lespinasse.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, jglisse@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz, minchan@google.com, dave@stgolabs.net, punit.agrawal@bytedance.com, lstoakes@gmail.com, hdanton@sina.com, apopple@nvidia.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 Tue, May 2, 2023 at 3:31=E2=80=AFPM Matthew Wilcox = wrote: > > On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 09:36:03AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 8:03=E2=80=AFAM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 10:04:56PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:22=E2=80=AFPM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 07:30:13PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrot= e: > > > > > > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 7:02=E2=80=AFPM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 10:50:23AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan = wrote: > > > > > > > > +++ b/mm/memory.c > > > > > > > > @@ -3711,11 +3711,6 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fa= ult *vmf) > > > > > > > > if (!pte_unmap_same(vmf)) > > > > > > > > goto out; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_VMA_LOCK) { > > > > > > > > - ret =3D VM_FAULT_RETRY; > > > > > > > > - goto out; > > > > > > > > - } > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > entry =3D pte_to_swp_entry(vmf->orig_pte); > > > > > > > > if (unlikely(non_swap_entry(entry))) { > > > > > > > > if (is_migration_entry(entry)) { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You're missing the necessary fallback in the (!folio) case. > > > > > > > swap_readpage() is synchronous and will sleep. > > > > > > > > > > > > True, but is it unsafe to do that under VMA lock and has to be = done > > > > > > under mmap_lock? > > > > > > > > > > ... you were the one arguing that we didn't want to wait for I/O = with > > > > > the VMA lock held? > > > > > > > > Well, that discussion was about waiting in folio_lock_or_retry() wi= th > > > > the lock being held. I argued against it because currently we drop > > > > mmap_lock lock before waiting, so if we don't drop VMA lock we woul= d > > > > be changing the current behavior which might introduce new > > > > regressions. In the case of swap_readpage and swapin_readahead we > > > > already wait with mmap_lock held, so waiting with VMA lock held doe= s > > > > not introduce new problems (unless there is a need to hold mmap_loc= k). > > > > > > > > That said, you are absolutely correct that this situation can be > > > > improved by dropping the lock in these cases too. I just didn't wan= t > > > > to attack everything at once. I believe after we agree on the appro= ach > > > > implemented in https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230501175025.36233-3-s= urenb@google.com > > > > for dropping the VMA lock before waiting, these cases can be added > > > > easier. Does that make sense? > > > > > > OK, I looked at this path some more, and I think we're fine. This > > > patch is only called for SWP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO which is only set for > > > QUEUE_FLAG_SYNCHRONOUS devices, which are brd, zram and nvdimms > > > (both btt and pmem). So the answer is that we don't sleep in this > > > path, and there's no need to drop the lock. > > > > Yes but swapin_readahead does sleep, so I'll have to handle that case > > too after this. > > Sleeping is OK, we do that in pXd_alloc()! Do we block on I/O anywhere > in swapin_readahead()? It all looks like async I/O to me. Hmm. I thought that we have synchronous I/O in the following paths: swapin_readahead()->swap_cluster_readahead()->swap_readpage() swapin_readahead()->swap_vma_readahead()->swap_readpage() but just noticed that in both cases swap_readpage() is called with the synchronous parameter being false. So you are probably right here... Does that mean swapin_readahead() might return a page which does not have its content swapped-in yet?