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 23A8AC52D7C for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A780C6B01F7; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:07:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A28656B01FE; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:07:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 8CA2B6B01FB; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:07:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDDA6B01F3 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:07:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin25.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E471C5662 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:50 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82480059900.25.475138D Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by imf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08A1F40034 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=lu8L21yG; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of agordeev@linux.ibm.com designates 148.163.156.1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=agordeev@linux.ibm.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1724335578; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=012mDUm2fCWZDcYIJ2hFYZSZaAjp60g7PcWojz+2NIk=; b=v/zH03B7+Tkh72TOJb08imZ51TZ+kCy8zJ2TZAA5W10ucwNX7eqf5eJzIpdgFRRTY0bI/r hg9nU+ahlxqCvB9PENAPfSQNtKD7It7yHeqI8OlBdthKaQpTW3w0kNeUUn0XPhIuLvGRV1 csUb1ytZ83ePli+7MoIFda84P52QW30= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1724335578; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=5N+6CORIFHnAc13PS9bWyfhw4c1kxQqemLfDPGIB3nfSu7ZotItVzlByYEwUbABSBSZ54I Rirk5foCUmX/86s+0U+M3cLQWeJB0eFPTl0iE7gATTYyZNlSx8TZ//hTdPwzHOqOo+86JN LnOsO7jsoMpV3WGOw9JTAJ1uxqoN/fg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=lu8L21yG; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of agordeev@linux.ibm.com designates 148.163.156.1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=agordeev@linux.ibm.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0353729.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 47M578Q1027428; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:03 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=pp1; bh=012mDUm2fCWZDcYIJ2hFYZSZaAj p60g7PcWojz+2NIk=; b=lu8L21yGqnD+aEH/XD4Frt5dOHPwym/cMrn1uj3GVa4 kzuO1DKexUdezI3Lef1EROsNR0YJHwQ+cuoVaJlf9cJi1Tbga4uqgXuWbGE6Fmi0 UyFcLtbb+vfxAU9jq0xiHCPPxFfSSEq74r8E6OH3h1tTvu16J5LgXVWzoWUpMySt tAEU8oFkFXuJWypIdR9T8o28/Ataz5dxpWlr5GJi4t7iHP3djTrVp/arawkT39Wg JYtfqueMjZdj7SFCZfXa0UKh1s/hxbFRXw3/CrBYFdntLsM5EPyegxcQ1XstMtsl PDly7cy4minOakIdflJ8HE3Wjg09J6vaTyHLbaWCfhQ== Received: from ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (db.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.219]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4141y20ptv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 47MC1itj017651; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:02 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.226]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4138w3cr2b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:02 +0000 Received: from smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.100]) by smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 47ME6wj655837100 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:00 GMT Received: from smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A5820043; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:06:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F6C320040; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:06:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-008a6a4c-3549-11b2-a85c-c5cc2836eea2.ibm.com (unknown [9.155.204.135]) by smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:06:58 +0000 (GMT) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 16:06:56 +0200 From: Alexander Gordeev To: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] s390: Remove custom definition of mk_pte() Message-ID: References: <20240814154427.162475-1-willy@infradead.org> <20240814154427.162475-5-willy@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240814154427.162475-5-willy@infradead.org> X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: K53dTj0IefNPmG9sfYv2aFJl57u7cE44 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: K53dTj0IefNPmG9sfYv2aFJl57u7cE44 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.28.16 definitions=2024-08-22_07,2024-08-22_01,2024-05-17_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=312 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2407110000 definitions=main-2408220105 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 08A1F40034 X-Stat-Signature: m75s5tu6a7jxqgxc8113mmsjfm18sqa1 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1724335667-890568 X-HE-Meta: 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 vKT/H44N ercXSnTVIWoWOKhcK8bwmSMUcIYHG2McOk6N/1eaEmwLp957jxZy0B25yEVr6gWxNZEvQIGxrHoP4mRfWWO+6DsjiWa7/5NnSuvl0ZlsHMLkQPTlG/dB+L6x2eAXlIY7jph7KHZSp5/1oFFV8kr64KePA2jVyPxJLgmvNZtuuEkCL3NISGXQoDGihvL+jjIeYxk+El+6+Y23EgxwJhglYofpAxrLINyIcD/f+6jLvdtAb9htpZe1g5OFEn3jlVKtEiQl6eOPW34HzSg0Ae5rPm5iP3GQJl1jSIwHtmSCtHujT3vVZJrFHzEFwsoyDNI+colFFB1RQZ3esNPeDSyNuUjxP1xBWRr9Mh4iFqQKOAPMNwyN8Zlt5qQM5lg== 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 Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 04:44:24PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote: Hi Matthew, > I believe the test for PageDirty() is no longer needed. The > commit adding it was abf09bed3cce with the rationale that this > avoided faults for tmpfs and shmem pages. shmem does not mark > newly allocated folios as dirty since 2016 (commit 75edd345e8ed) > so this test has been ineffective since then. The PageDirty() test you suggest to remove is still entered. I initially thought that test could also be useful for other architectures as an optimization, but at least one path we take for shmem mapping is raising eyebrow, because it is a read accesss: handle_pte_fault() -> do_pte_missing() -> do_fault() -> do_read_fault() -> finish_fault() -> set_pte_range() -> mk_pte() A read fault causing the PTE dirtifying is something strange and your patch alone could be a nice cleanup. As other architectures do not do such a trick suggests that mk_pte() + pte_mkdirty() is called from the same handler or pte_mkdirty() is expected to be called from a follow-up write handler. I could not identify locations where that would not be the case, but may be you know? ... > -static inline pte_t mk_pte(struct page *page, pgprot_t pgprot) > -{ > - unsigned long physpage = page_to_phys(page); > - pte_t __pte = mk_pte_phys(physpage, pgprot); > - > - if (pte_write(__pte) && PageDirty(page)) > - __pte = pte_mkdirty(__pte); > - return __pte; > -} > -#define mk_pte mk_pte Thanks!