linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Jerome Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>,
	John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
	"Alistair Popple" <apopple@nvidia.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] mm: support THP migration to device private memory
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 15:38:42 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bbf1f0df-85f3-5887-050e-beb2aad750f2@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201109091415.GC28918@lst.de>


On 11/9/20 1:14 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:26:50PM -0800, Ralph Campbell wrote:
>>
>> On 11/6/20 12:03 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> I hate the extra pin count magic here.  IMHO we really need to finish
>>> off the series to get rid of the extra references on the ZONE_DEVICE
>>> pages first.
>>
>> First, thanks for the review comments.
>>
>> I don't like the extra refcount either, that is why I tried to fix that up
>> before resending this series. However, you didn't like me just fixing the
>> refcount only for device private pages and I don't know the dax/pmem code
>> and peer-to-peer PCIe uses of ZONE_DEVICE pages well enough to say how
>> long it will take me to fix all the use cases.
>> So I wanted to make progress on the THP migration code in the mean time.
> 
> I think P2P is pretty trivial, given that ZONE_DEVICE pages are used like
> a normal memory allocator.  DAX is the interesting case, any specific
> help that you need with that?

There are 4 types of ZONE_DEVICE struct pages:
MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE, MEMORY_DEVICE_FS_DAX, MEMORY_DEVICE_GENERIC, and
MEMORY_DEVICE_PCI_P2PDMA.

Currently, memremap_pages() allocates struct pages for a physical address range
with a page_ref_count(page) of one and increments the pgmap->ref per CPU
reference count by the number of pages created since each ZONE_DEVICE struct
page has a pointer to the pgmap.

The struct pages are not freed until memunmap_pages() is called which
calls put_page() which calls put_dev_pagemap() which releases a reference to
pgmap->ref. memunmap_pages() blocks waiting for pgmap->ref reference count
to be zero. As far as I can tell, the put_page() in memunmap_pages() has to
be the *last* put_page() (see MEMORY_DEVICE_PCI_P2PDMA).
My RFC [1] breaks this put_page() -> put_dev_pagemap() connection so that
the struct page reference count can go to zero and back to non-zero without
changing the pgmap->ref reference count.

Q1: Is that safe? Is there some code that depends on put_page() dropping
the pgmap->ref reference count as part of memunmap_pages()?
My testing of [1] seems OK but I'm sure there are lots of cases I didn't test.

MEMORY_DEVICE_PCI_P2PDMA:
Struct pages are created in pci_p2pdma_add_resource() and represent device
memory accessible by PCIe bar address space. Memory is allocated with
pci_alloc_p2pmem() based on a byte length but the gen_pool_alloc_owner()
call will allocate memory in a minimum of PAGE_SIZE units.
Reference counting is +1 per *allocation* on the pgmap->ref reference count.
Note that this is not +1 per page which is what put_page() expects. So
currently, a get_page()/put_page() works OK because the page reference count
only goes 1->2 and 2->1. If it went to zero, the pgmap->ref reference count
would be incorrect if the allocation size was greater than one page.

I see pci_alloc_p2pmem() is called by nvme_alloc_sq_cmds() and
pci_p2pmem_alloc_sgl() to create a command queue and a struct scatterlist *.
Looks like sg_page(sg) returns the ZONE_DEVICE struct page of the scatterlist.
There are a huge number of places sg_page() is called so it is hard to tell
whether or not get_page()/put_page() is ever called on MEMORY_DEVICE_PCI_P2PDMA
pages. pci_p2pmem_virt_to_bus() will return the physical address and I guess
pfn_to_page(physaddr >> PAGE_SHIFT) could return the struct page.

Since there is a clear allocation/free, pci_alloc_p2pmem() can probably be
modified to increment/decrement the MEMORY_DEVICE_PCI_P2PDMA struct page
reference count. Or maybe just leave it at one like it is now.

MEMORY_DEVICE_GENERIC:
Struct pages are created in dev_dax_probe() and represent non-volatile memory.
The device can be mmap()'ed which calls dax_mmap() which sets
vma->vm_flags | VM_HUGEPAGE.
A CPU page fault will result in a PTE, PMD, or PUD sized page
(but not compound) to be inserted by vmf_insert_mixed() which will call either
insert_pfn() or insert_page().
Neither insert_pfn() nor insert_page() increments the page reference count.
Invalidations don't callback into the device driver so I don't see how page
reference counts can be tracked without adding a mmu_interval_notifier.

I think just leaving the page reference count at one is better than trying
to use the mmu_interval_notifier or changing vmf_insert_mixed() and
invalidations of pfn_t_devmap(pfn) to adjust the page reference count.

MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE:
This case has the most core mm code having to specially check for
is_device_private_page() and adjusting the expected reference count when the
page isn't mapped by any process. There is a clear allocation and free so it
can be changed to use a reference count of zero while free (see [2]).

MEMORY_DEVICE_FS_DAX:
Struct pages are created in pmem_attach_disk() and virtio_fs_setup_dax() with
an initial reference count of one.
The problem I see is that there are 3 states that are important:
a) memory is free and not allocated to any file (page_ref_count() == 0).
b) memory is allocated to a file and in the page cache (page_ref_count() == 1).
c) some gup() or I/O has a reference even after calling unmap_mapping_pages()
    (page_ref_count() > 1). ext4_break_layouts() basically waits until the
    page_ref_count() == 1 with put_page() calling wake_up_var(&page->_refcount)
    to wake up ext4_break_layouts().
The current code doesn't seem to distinguish (a) and (b). If we want to use
the 0->1 reference count to signal (c), then the page cache would have hold
entries with a page_ref_count() == 0 which doesn't match the general page cache
assumptions.

Q2: So how should I resolve that?

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20201001181715.17416-1-rcampbell@nvidia.com
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20201012174540.17328-1-rcampbell@nvidia.com


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-11-11 23:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-06  0:51 [PATCH v3 0/6] mm/hmm/nouveau: add THP migration to migrate_vma_* Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  0:51 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] mm/thp: add prep_transhuge_device_private_page() Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  7:55   ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-06 20:56     ` Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06 12:14   ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-11-06 20:34     ` Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  0:51 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] mm/migrate: move migrate_vma_collect_skip() Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  7:56   ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-06  7:57   ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-06  0:51 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] mm: support THP migration to device private memory Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  8:03   ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-06 21:26     ` Ralph Campbell
2020-11-09  9:14       ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-09 21:34         ` Ralph Campbell
2020-11-11 23:38         ` Ralph Campbell [this message]
2020-11-20 20:01           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-12-02 10:08             ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-05  8:22               ` Roger Pau Monné
2020-12-02 10:14           ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-02 18:01             ` Logan Gunthorpe
2020-11-06  0:51 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] mm/thp: add THP allocation helper Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  8:01   ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-06 21:09     ` Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  0:51 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] mm/hmm/test: add self tests for THP migration Ralph Campbell
2020-11-06  0:51 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] nouveau: support THP migration to private memory Ralph Campbell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bbf1f0df-85f3-5887-050e-beb2aad750f2@nvidia.com \
    --to=rcampbell@nvidia.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bharata@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bskeggs@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox