Re: [patch 1/6] mm/vmalloc: Prevent stale TLBs in fully utilized blocks

[Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>]

On 05/24/23 at 11:52am, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, May 24 2023 at 17:32, Baoquan He wrote:
> > On 05/23/23 at 04:02pm, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> @@ -2236,9 +2236,10 @@ static void _vm_unmap_aliases(unsigned l
> >>  	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> >>  		struct vmap_block_queue *vbq = &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, cpu);
> >>  		struct vmap_block *vb;
> >> +		unsigned long idx;
> >>  
> >>  		rcu_read_lock();
> >
> > Do we need to remove this rcu_read_xx() pair since it marks the RCU
> > read-side critical section on vbq-free list?
> 
> And what protects the xarray lookup?

We have put rcu_read_lock() pair around the xas_find(). And it will find
into xarray for each iteration item. We won't lose the connection to the
next element like list adding or deleting? not very sure, I could be
wrong.

xa_for_each()
-->xa_for_each_start()
   -->xa_for_each_range()
      -->xa_find()
       
void *xa_find(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long *indexp,
                        unsigned long max, xa_mark_t filter)
{
...... 
        rcu_read_lock();
        do {
                if ((__force unsigned int)filter < XA_MAX_MARKS)
                        entry = xas_find_marked(&xas, max, filter);
                else
                        entry = xas_find(&xas, max);
        } while (xas_retry(&xas, entry));
        rcu_read_unlock();
 
        if (entry)
                *indexp = xas.xa_index;
        return entry;
}

> 
> >> -		list_for_each_entry_rcu(vb, &vbq->free, free_list) {
> >> +		xa_for_each(&vbq->vmap_blocks, idx, vb) {
> >>  			spin_lock(&vb->lock);
> >>  			if (vb->dirty && vb->dirty != VMAP_BBMAP_BITS) {
> >>  				unsigned long va_start = vb->va->va_start;
> >> 
>