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 51339C02183 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:00:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C76966B0099; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:00:22 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C25EB6B009A; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:00:22 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id AC74D6B009C; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:00:22 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846406B0099 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:00:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin11.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF4CA020D for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:00:22 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83003344284.11.00F65E8 Received: from mail-qt1-f172.google.com (mail-qt1-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2901D180006 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:00:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b="iK04/Vwh"; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of surenb@google.com designates 209.85.160.172 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=surenb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1736794820; 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=ouVlFUZRREhIoHjGwLjVd+KkkJaABABdY0WLsWGy1pI=; b=GabBHDUDVR+WxPN2yJGXgpSLInOLvp2rcfN76C9BOwVypFXsqhscNwcJQcMvZ3/eo49+E+ WrRnE/OyDCg7wb+pyDchlWvjl0A9Zhh+Clalaz/p3sIWOvL0GWTJ3GYW4Sy/zUsOpawyIv JvGmOUTaio42rX3hXOiljtVyVEWX68o= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1736794820; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=rrn/Ls2vYkYb5du7VndEJTAh+N3XqPmAfEWf7R2GXWbevbDqQ0TN87aQ0SQZMTvO9ci/jl 19sNcwAD9vdY4VD5UWBAEsh7kzLxdSiyFeKNHocS6mL/rVUL9NYhp2QTIY3kMzrW2dw5qj dS/8cWvAAYjs1HQhoqI9l8o7TK1mN2E= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b="iK04/Vwh"; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of surenb@google.com designates 209.85.160.172 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=surenb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com Received: by mail-qt1-f172.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4679b5c66d0so24671cf.1 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:00:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1736794819; x=1737399619; darn=kvack.org; 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=ouVlFUZRREhIoHjGwLjVd+KkkJaABABdY0WLsWGy1pI=; b=iK04/VwhsEOEoYzoTDHvDBMy3UB8ffTRzaFFeHrsXIWAUbkwEIQSxzhw4xqHSw65bO zOC2TKmfZVHI6zchMQXYsMiBBzLK+PvOFgrmyMEATFuodED0+pUiIissl8gNB/ZZBdpn YPtpS5KVCSjeMCFCKZdGlIVp0C4DxxZzqIVFJgzpkezYLyfjM8v9ByOnmw/+rRiRdWzm sovy8t5daH03LRPFpIGfGh94XL88detl3gfUshZjZqdZBK2TOr28AYo5zPspJYjZ7/D3 /feFwI89jW1Pf87FDyELpKISrEdZAQj6nt6jD2gZtSEzQkgAWmdLfs8OBZFmdzt1+M6M 2FiQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736794819; x=1737399619; 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=ouVlFUZRREhIoHjGwLjVd+KkkJaABABdY0WLsWGy1pI=; b=gCGs0b7dGE3XhVEkjD3oZIcrCHNB7zw6rRX818aoH7qMreoFeEuD32qKLlnnlG//V5 yoxF+L4ihlwzzlOrfc0iG+ypq+N8woVjpn2JY9qTpQsj43l2eDgbVlPGymFvvhk62MZR oXqqutqHPFtERELNVrpJf5XsKDw5LgepHEGKH+riKiU0DqQE+A0W8kNAIGbVwwp7jZi+ QcV3MfQZjBVGUJC6l8VxqqW0Q+UdIsmzI4+RVAFVGGynN7iV/pa3FhLfA4fRvCWzE6Di SAXPew7HfDXd4dpLCaapLxmG+ka4eQtfj3eKWXSR+iKdOX5JX+GlMwL9UM2Nt7BPUpnB 9URw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWWzYebd02Zr7KPHeX5t3bjlutV3nxvtKaY96TvGzloRzksCLVLAXpUWUfdPwWIHIYtGkqyOVy+yQ==@kvack.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxoyiRmhR6nGhh+cD+A2RZyQ1VZaqocIekDwJdb3i43JSxb3tMx 8vBAKFYmWRKM0ju2GLzs77MJPB8VqtNY8uSrB+yl6B/r4RfT73Mc7Nra5RhD8X6b80CHaimQLZn GkVYrm7kC1WWXcdAzo2Di+HNYJcq00gXbmfVc X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsqKjgey8wAQ347c2taRY+K08neDfRCoB31WonMn3otD7UE3EKJ0/gJJoUZTfK ih9sPTSOxo2BO+nqUSAjexVNYPJJrwyWXbBbLPg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFiFwIAJreck2eXuGVLCOpCUJxrqm617YL59uzixOqSrS1FvAoVIadqd4lHXuvB/ws5gDgj75RK3fW/jzook1c= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5d50:0:b0:466:7926:c69 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-46de97879d8mr46011cf.20.1736794818718; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:00:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250111042604.3230628-1-surenb@google.com> <5aecdfec-5939-4627-a27b-f2057a95fb65@lucifer.local> In-Reply-To: <5aecdfec-5939-4627-a27b-f2057a95fb65@lucifer.local> From: Suren Baghdasaryan Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:00:07 -0800 X-Gm-Features: AbW1kvbdq65ih4O_ouYS9lC3SM0GkRt4MwWyHNynzPPrbMuh3Qv-A3rG0pdfQLU Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/17] reimplement per-vma lock as a refcount To: Lorenzo Stoakes Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, willy@infradead.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, david.laight.linux@gmail.com, mhocko@suse.com, vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mjguzik@gmail.com, oliver.sang@intel.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net, david@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, oleg@redhat.com, dave@stgolabs.net, paulmck@kernel.org, brauner@kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com, hdanton@sina.com, hughd@google.com, lokeshgidra@google.com, minchan@google.com, jannh@google.com, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, souravpanda@google.com, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, klarasmodin@gmail.com, richard.weiyang@gmail.com, corbet@lwn.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 2901D180006 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Stat-Signature: 5ybybg46cxwxcr1ta8nwiouzcq1zy8km X-HE-Tag: 1736794819-694987 X-HE-Meta: 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 sEQqMA6S NTubmOz66sZzb/VrV6DnAOCZkL45afxNRD+t0NfbQmTIC2Yazgavq/8RX8M+DDerr3cS4CCZ4i/rZPKpjm+A9TIfm8UkWQzkVUivvQRcUx76gDVEC1Rm5/m2/3YX1IGSbK+jsBZbNbbwNOJO72QoJb3vEtKGtustlK5iMwlaCc5veJV1211HYPi8llsUOTmAmu0thsu8gocHACtXL5xlrmNeozZz4x1GLL9GyjO1yp8gYyJec9IiE3PtZfz+0ZbRbKVtTH2W26KUTaNdQ/jE02GSvhlKu7XD4Biso6b65rMyhHqUgFw1YzNi+kI/Li8L3m4o24w4RzHZhhyUPl6hcJpYoWevONSFnwqMXmwaIXycGzfrmy3bdZONUw3OxOxWSe3Mt 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 Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 9:11=E2=80=AFAM Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 08:58:37AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 4:14=E2=80=AFAM Lorenzo Stoakes > > wrote: > > > > > > A nit on subject, I mean this is part of what this series does, and h= ey - > > > we have only so much text to put in here - but isn't this both > > > reimplementing per-VMA lock as a refcount _and_ importantly allocatin= g VMAs > > > using the RCU typesafe mechanism? > > > > > > Do we have to do both in one series? Can we split this out? I mean ma= ybe > > > that's just churny and unnecessary, but to me this series is 'allocat= e VMAs > > > RCU safe and refcount VMA lock' or something like this. Maybe this is > > > nitty... but still :) > > > > There is "motivational dependency" because one of the main reasons I'm > > converting the vm_lock into vm_refcnt is to make it easier to add > > SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU (see my last reply to Hillf). But technically we > > can leave the SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU out of this series if that makes > > thighs easier. That would be the 2 patches at the end: > > Right yeah... maybe it's better to do it in one hit. > > > > > mm: prepare lock_vma_under_rcu() for vma reuse possibility > > mm: make vma cache SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU > > > > I made sure that each patch is bisectable, so there should not be a > > problem with tracking issues. > > > > > > > > One general comment here - this is a really major change in how this = stuff > > > works, and yet I don't see any tests anywhere in the series. > > > > Hmm. I was diligently updating the tests to reflect the replacement of > > vm_lock with vm_refcnt and adding assertions for detach/attach cases. > > This actually reminds me that I missed updading vm_area_struct in > > vma_internal.h for the member regrouping patch; will add that. I think > > the only part that did not affect tests is SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU but I > > was not sure what kind of testing I can add for that. Any suggestions > > would be welcomed. > > And to be clear I'm super grateful you did that :) thanks, be good to > change the member regrouping thing also. > > But that doesn't change the fact that this series has exactly zero tests > for it. And for something so broad, it feels like a big issue, we really > want to be careful with something so big here. > > You've also noticed that I've cleverly failed to _actually_ suggest > SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU tests, and mea culpa - it's super hard to think of h= ow > to test that. > > Liam has experience doing RCU testing this for the maple tree stuff, but = it > wasn't pretty and wasn't easy and would probably require massive rework t= o > expose this stuff to some viable testing environment, or in other words - > is unworkable. > > HOWEVER, I feel like maybe we could try to create scenarios where we migh= t > trigger reuse bugs? > > Perhaps some userland code, perhaps even constrained by cgroup, that maps= a > ton of stuff and unmaps in a loop in parallel? > > Perhaps create scenarios with shared memory where we up refcounts a lot t= oo? I have this old spf_test (https://github.com/surenbaghdasaryan/spf_test/blob/main/spf_test.c) which I often use to weed out vma locking issues because it starts multiple threads doing mmap + page faults. Perhaps we can repackage it into a test/benchmark for testing contention on mmap/vma locks? > > Anyway, this is necessarily nebulous without further investigation, what = I > was thinking more concretely is: > > Using the VMA userland testing: > > 1. Assert reference count correctness across locking scenarios and variou= s > VMA operations. > 2. Assert correct detached/not detached state across different scenarios. > > This won't quite be complete as not everything is separated out quite > enough to allow things like process tear down/forking etc. to be explicit= ly > tested but you can unit tests the VMA bits at least. > > One note on this, I intend to split the vma.c file into multiple files in > tools/testing/vma/ so if you add tests here it'd be worth probably puttin= g > them into a new file. > > I'm happy to help with this if you need any assistance, feel free to ping= ! As a starting point I was thinking of changing vma_assert_attached()/vma_assert_detached() and vma_mark_attached()/vma_mark_detached() to return a bool and use WARN_ON_ONCE() (to address your concern about asserts being dependent on CONFIG_DEBUG_VM) like this: static inline bool vma_assert_detached() { return !WARN_ON_ONCE(atomic_read(&vma->vm_refcnt)); } static inline bool vma_mark_attached(struct vm_area_struct *vma) { vma_assert_write_locked(vma); if (!vma_assert_detached(vma)) return false; atomic_set(&vma->vm_refcnt, 1); return true; } With that we can add correctness checks in the tools/testing/vma/vma.c for different states, for example in the alloc_and_link_vma() we can check that after vma_link() the vma is indeed attached: ASSERT_TRUE(vma_assert_attached(vma)); This might not cover all states but is probably a good starting point. WDYT= ? > > Sorry to put this on you so late in the series, I realise it's annoying, > but I feel like things have changed a lot and obviously aggregated with t= wo > series in one in effect and these are genuine concerns that at this stage= I > feel like we need to try to at least make some headway on. > > > > > > > > > I know it's tricky to write tests for this, but the new VMA testing > > > environment should make it possible to test a _lot_ more than we prev= iously > > > could. > > > > > > However due to some (*ahem*) interesting distribution of where functi= ons > > > are, most notably stuff in kernel/fork.c, I guess we can't test > > > _everything_ there effectively. > > > > > > But I do feel like we should be able to do better than having absolut= ely no > > > testing added for this? > > > > Again, I'm open to suggestions for SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU testing but > > for the rest I thought the tests were modified accordingly. > > See above ^ > > > > > > > > > I think there's definitely quite a bit you could test now, at least i= n > > > asserting fundamentals in tools/testing/vma/vma.c. > > > > > > This can cover at least detached state asserts in various scenarios. > > > > Ok, you mean to check that VMA re-attachment/re-detachment would > > trigger assertions? I'll look into adding tests for that. > > Yeah this is one, see above :) > > > > > > > > > But that won't cover off the really gnarly stuff here around RCU slab > > > allocation, and determining precisely how to test that in a sensible = way is > > > maybe less clear. > > > > > > But I'd like to see _something_ here please, this is more or less > > > fundamentally changing how all VMAs are allocated and to just have no= thing > > > feels unfortunate. > > > > Again, I'm open to suggestions on what kind of testing I can add for > > SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU change. > > See above > > > > > > > > > I'm already nervous because we've hit issues coming up to v9 and we'r= e not > > > 100% sure if a recent syzkaller is related to these changes or not, I= 'm not > > > sure how much we can get assurances with tests but I'd like something= . > > > > If you are referring to the issue at [1], I think David ran the > > syzcaller against mm-stable that does not contain this patchset and > > the issue still triggered (see [2]). This of course does not guarantee > > that this patchset has no other issues :) I'll try adding tests for > > re-attaching, re-detaching and welcome ideas on how to test > > SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU transition. > > Thanks, > > Suren. > > OK that's reassuring! > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/6758f0cc.050a0220.17f54a.0001.GAE@googl= e.com/ > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/67823fba.050a0220.216c54.001c.GAE@googl= e.com/ > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 08:25:47PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > Back when per-vma locks were introduces, vm_lock was moved out of > > > > vm_area_struct in [1] because of the performance regression caused = by > > > > false cacheline sharing. Recent investigation [2] revealed that the > > > > regressions is limited to a rather old Broadwell microarchitecture = and > > > > even there it can be mitigated by disabling adjacent cacheline > > > > prefetching, see [3]. > > > > Splitting single logical structure into multiple ones leads to more > > > > complicated management, extra pointer dereferences and overall less > > > > maintainable code. When that split-away part is a lock, it complica= tes > > > > things even further. With no performance benefits, there are no rea= sons > > > > for this split. Merging the vm_lock back into vm_area_struct also a= llows > > > > vm_area_struct to use SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU later in this patchset. > > > > This patchset: > > > > 1. moves vm_lock back into vm_area_struct, aligning it at the cache= line > > > > boundary and changing the cache to be cacheline-aligned to minimize > > > > cacheline sharing; > > > > 2. changes vm_area_struct initialization to mark new vma as detache= d until > > > > it is inserted into vma tree; > > > > 3. replaces vm_lock and vma->detached flag with a reference counter= ; > > > > 4. regroups vm_area_struct members to fit them into 3 cachelines; > > > > 5. changes vm_area_struct cache to SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU to allow fo= r their > > > > reuse and to minimize call_rcu() calls. > > > > > > > > Pagefault microbenchmarks show performance improvement: > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-1 507926.5547 ( 0.00%) 506519.3692 * -= 0.28%* > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-4 479119.7051 ( 0.00%) 481333.6802 * = 0.46%* > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-7 452880.2961 ( 0.00%) 455845.6211 * = 0.65%* > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-12 347639.1021 ( 0.00%) 352004.2254 * = 1.26%* > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-21 200061.2238 ( 0.00%) 229597.0317 * 1= 4.76%* > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-30 145251.2001 ( 0.00%) 164202.5067 * 1= 3.05%* > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-48 106848.4434 ( 0.00%) 120641.5504 * 1= 2.91%* > > > > Hmean faults/cpu-56 92472.3835 ( 0.00%) 103464.7916 * 1= 1.89%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-1 507566.1468 ( 0.00%) 506139.0811 * -= 0.28%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-4 1880478.2402 ( 0.00%) 1886795.6329 * = 0.34%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-7 3106394.3438 ( 0.00%) 3140550.7485 * = 1.10%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-12 4061358.4795 ( 0.00%) 4112477.0206 * = 1.26%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-21 3988619.1169 ( 0.00%) 4577747.1436 * 1= 4.77%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-30 3909839.5449 ( 0.00%) 4311052.2787 * 1= 0.26%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-48 4761108.4691 ( 0.00%) 5283790.5026 * 1= 0.98%* > > > > Hmean faults/sec-56 4885561.4590 ( 0.00%) 5415839.4045 * 1= 0.85%* > > > > > > > > Changes since v8 [4]: > > > > - Change subject for the cover letter, per Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Added Reviewed-by and Acked-by, per Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Added static check for no-limit case in __refcount_add_not_zero_l= imited, > > > > per David Laight > > > > - Fixed vma_refcount_put() to call rwsem_release() unconditionally, > > > > per Hillf Danton and Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Use a copy of vma->vm_mm in vma_refcount_put() in case vma is fre= ed from > > > > under us, per Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Removed extra rcu_read_lock()/rcu_read_unlock() in vma_end_read()= , > > > > per Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Changed __vma_enter_locked() parameter to centralize refcount log= ic, > > > > per Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Amended description in vm_lock replacement patch explaining the e= ffects > > > > of the patch on vm_area_struct size, per Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Added vm_area_struct member regrouping patch [5] into the series > > > > - Renamed vma_copy() into vm_area_init_from(), per Liam R. Howlett > > > > - Added a comment for vm_area_struct to update vm_area_init_from() = when > > > > adding new members, per Vlastimil Babka > > > > - Updated a comment about unstable src->shared.rb when copying a vm= a in > > > > vm_area_init_from(), per Vlastimil Babka > > > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230227173632.3292573-34-surenb@go= ogle.com/ > > > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZsQyI%2F087V34JoIt@xsang-OptiPlex-9= 020/ > > > > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAJuCfpEisU8Lfe96AYJDZ+OM4NoPmnw9bP= 53cT_kbfP_pR+-2g@mail.gmail.com/ > > > > [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250109023025.2242447-1-surenb@goo= gle.com/ > > > > [5] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241111205506.3404479-5-surenb@goo= gle.com/ > > > > > > > > Patchset applies over mm-unstable after reverting v8 > > > > (current SHA range: 235b5129cb7b - 9e6b24c58985) > > > > > > > > Suren Baghdasaryan (17): > > > > mm: introduce vma_start_read_locked{_nested} helpers > > > > mm: move per-vma lock into vm_area_struct > > > > mm: mark vma as detached until it's added into vma tree > > > > mm: introduce vma_iter_store_attached() to use with attached vmas > > > > mm: mark vmas detached upon exit > > > > types: move struct rcuwait into types.h > > > > mm: allow vma_start_read_locked/vma_start_read_locked_nested to f= ail > > > > mm: move mmap_init_lock() out of the header file > > > > mm: uninline the main body of vma_start_write() > > > > refcount: introduce __refcount_{add|inc}_not_zero_limited > > > > mm: replace vm_lock and detached flag with a reference count > > > > mm: move lesser used vma_area_struct members into the last cachel= ine > > > > mm/debug: print vm_refcnt state when dumping the vma > > > > mm: remove extra vma_numab_state_init() call > > > > mm: prepare lock_vma_under_rcu() for vma reuse possibility > > > > mm: make vma cache SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU > > > > docs/mm: document latest changes to vm_lock > > > > > > > > Documentation/mm/process_addrs.rst | 44 ++++---- > > > > include/linux/mm.h | 156 ++++++++++++++++++++++---= ---- > > > > include/linux/mm_types.h | 75 +++++++------- > > > > include/linux/mmap_lock.h | 6 -- > > > > include/linux/rcuwait.h | 13 +-- > > > > include/linux/refcount.h | 24 ++++- > > > > include/linux/slab.h | 6 -- > > > > include/linux/types.h | 12 +++ > > > > kernel/fork.c | 129 +++++++++++------------- > > > > mm/debug.c | 12 +++ > > > > mm/init-mm.c | 1 + > > > > mm/memory.c | 97 ++++++++++++++++-- > > > > mm/mmap.c | 3 +- > > > > mm/userfaultfd.c | 32 +++--- > > > > mm/vma.c | 23 ++--- > > > > mm/vma.h | 15 ++- > > > > tools/testing/vma/linux/atomic.h | 5 + > > > > tools/testing/vma/vma_internal.h | 93 ++++++++--------- > > > > 18 files changed, 465 insertions(+), 281 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.47.1.613.gc27f4b7a9f-goog > > > >