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 844F8C07CB1 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 12:01:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 01EAA6B02DA; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 07:01:22 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id F11066B02DB; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 07:01:21 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D62EF6B02DC; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 07:01:21 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5B026B02DA for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 07:01:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871DC1201F5 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 12:01:21 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81503593962.19.15568ED Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by imf16.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA63518004F for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 12:01:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf16.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=bIBcRxMz; spf=pass (imf16.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1701086477; 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=DEGlXRGinJqVpSdJyXUQkv9137ntAYjqn0/11AplDSc=; b=RU6Q+pelbsms90NDzdhluSObdWvlrVSxtEFGVbD6wJ2abddRKW6dAJsfOk5otkFyxULHsK ZoaJmf6pD30ptMmcCCGVFhSpQ8kinCiLIXyf9k6v16YITkOXx4+IA2U1XewIglD+8VXI4j D3NXtqQbaqDj4jf+mvhIJZGjIPQrj/A= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1701086477; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=NLA+vHF4nlxhbXWsXVC1SSBkrJExevvv1+DB51O0SuTf86WHyC5BhwXVGDibVQnGLH9gjV iG7j06JtCdS5/RRtcGsClJEF6qIQ8qSORVHdpgk0kpvMQluqTi90Co1g5MzbI1Ivfl6XWo oO3+/W84llhCXhA1zkSJ8xeF8HypgnQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf16.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=bIBcRxMz; spf=pass (imf16.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1701086475; h=from:from: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:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=DEGlXRGinJqVpSdJyXUQkv9137ntAYjqn0/11AplDSc=; b=bIBcRxMz7rn4o0xg/+yYQBX4oYpJj6Bu8kyeTGmtpUejaq4wmsDpIIt93cecMFcLIovyO1 jYuL7O0wIJrtAmxWMDrYaC8STUuTUEgAbcShYpR2fLijh0MNbSNTYNfFdBO5oI/1oUs/x8 dYM6up4RDlK6xsZhsZuU3Mfu1G5uHso= Received: from mail-lj1-f200.google.com (mail-lj1-f200.google.com [209.85.208.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-612-qIhdWBLcM3GSsdJUeRauaQ-1; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 07:01:11 -0500 X-MC-Unique: qIhdWBLcM3GSsdJUeRauaQ-1 Received: by mail-lj1-f200.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2c5194d4e98so36304021fa.3 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 04:01:11 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1701086470; x=1701691270; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:organization:autocrypt:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=DEGlXRGinJqVpSdJyXUQkv9137ntAYjqn0/11AplDSc=; b=NMgzHHjKvVn9TjRcQFREUrlkypS7DlutUJUlCI0T6kmOT+S3FTOxCrWtYeLwCTn6no r6MI3RGQN7oeq1k/ky4evHHIisnz1eXvkMHvfAeM+Ag0guxLPnq8zJ6gQoCThdSxMu8q CsJsqHPZe8Dienbt/+gjbRkx1rAXu1fIiVbWwjNuGGKnk9YStpo3ahLRkeA8yMqJYxNy /v9oHUUEbQ9qQk4slgQ9i0fPEMleFALabtXIoyZ1Em7Z2fNO5zfybBgNvrJKhdT6fc06 U5AtTPV7Zcp/afObPTWYLzErJfJLzLUi8UKWzrPzY3HHpxxIJKoRR7kNss5bI2ndgkUB sbnQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzfdzVEnOb+oxhT6PMvA7kS/rcIQirZkXQ5t9eKMilP19h7VfZ6 QW8cDaB0dnLeU8Abplfuj5C63uexesqoWQefhgiMjLkyujpBdWCe5Y+ZSCnVhIiYvYM8+xSGMH+ 258kllnSSR/w= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a691:0:b0:2c9:a178:41af with SMTP id q17-20020a2ea691000000b002c9a17841afmr1864958lje.45.1701086469951; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 04:01:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGJIa+spGALi0wSgxPsdhOV5PnqUioZNuhD4uBt2764CL9FwF8/7Xc1aYJIZBXSILui1GYWjA== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a691:0:b0:2c9:a178:41af with SMTP id q17-20020a2ea691000000b002c9a17841afmr1864932lje.45.1701086469459; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 04:01:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2003:cb:c745:2a00:d74a:a8c5:20b6:3ec3? (p200300cbc7452a00d74aa8c520b63ec3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:cb:c745:2a00:d74a:a8c5:20b6:3ec3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n44-20020a05600c502c00b004083a105f27sm14404237wmr.26.2023.11.27.04.01.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Nov 2023 04:01:09 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 13:01:07 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC V3 PATCH] arm64: mm: swap: save and restore mte tags for large folios To: Ryan Roberts , Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, Steven Price Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mhocko@suse.com, shy828301@gmail.com, v-songbaohua@oppo.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, willy@infradead.org, xiang@kernel.org, ying.huang@intel.com, yuzhao@google.com References: <20231114014313.67232-1-v-songbaohua@oppo.com> <864489b3-5d85-4145-b5bb-5d8a74b9b92d@redhat.com> <8c7f1a2f-57d2-4f20-abb2-394c7980008e@redhat.com> <5de66ff5-b6c8-4ffc-acd9-59aec4604ca4@redhat.com> <71c4b8b2-512a-4e50-9160-6ee77a5ec0a4@arm.com> <679a144a-db47-4d05-bbf7-b6a0514f5ed0@arm.com> From: David Hildenbrand Autocrypt: addr=david@redhat.com; keydata= xsFNBFXLn5EBEAC+zYvAFJxCBY9Tr1xZgcESmxVNI/0ffzE/ZQOiHJl6mGkmA1R7/uUpiCjJ dBrn+lhhOYjjNefFQou6478faXE6o2AhmebqT4KiQoUQFV4R7y1KMEKoSyy8hQaK1umALTdL QZLQMzNE74ap+GDK0wnacPQFpcG1AE9RMq3aeErY5tujekBS32jfC/7AnH7I0v1v1TbbK3Gp XNeiN4QroO+5qaSr0ID2sz5jtBLRb15RMre27E1ImpaIv2Jw8NJgW0k/D1RyKCwaTsgRdwuK Kx/Y91XuSBdz0uOyU/S8kM1+ag0wvsGlpBVxRR/xw/E8M7TEwuCZQArqqTCmkG6HGcXFT0V9 PXFNNgV5jXMQRwU0O/ztJIQqsE5LsUomE//bLwzj9IVsaQpKDqW6TAPjcdBDPLHvriq7kGjt WhVhdl0qEYB8lkBEU7V2Yb+SYhmhpDrti9Fq1EsmhiHSkxJcGREoMK/63r9WLZYI3+4W2rAc UucZa4OT27U5ZISjNg3Ev0rxU5UH2/pT4wJCfxwocmqaRr6UYmrtZmND89X0KigoFD/XSeVv jwBRNjPAubK9/k5NoRrYqztM9W6sJqrH8+UWZ1Idd/DdmogJh0gNC0+N42Za9yBRURfIdKSb B3JfpUqcWwE7vUaYrHG1nw54pLUoPG6sAA7Mehl3nd4pZUALHwARAQABzSREYXZpZCBIaWxk ZW5icmFuZCA8ZGF2aWRAcmVkaGF0LmNvbT7CwZgEEwEIAEICGwMGCwkIBwMCBhUIAgkKCwQW AgMBAh4BAheAAhkBFiEEG9nKrXNcTDpGDfzKTd4Q9wD/g1oFAl8Ox4kFCRKpKXgACgkQTd4Q 9wD/g1oHcA//a6Tj7SBNjFNM1iNhWUo1lxAja0lpSodSnB2g4FCZ4R61SBR4l/psBL73xktp rDHrx4aSpwkRP6Epu6mLvhlfjmkRG4OynJ5HG1gfv7RJJfnUdUM1z5kdS8JBrOhMJS2c/gPf wv1TGRq2XdMPnfY2o0CxRqpcLkx4vBODvJGl2mQyJF/gPepdDfcT8/PY9BJ7FL6Hrq1gnAo4 3Iv9qV0JiT2wmZciNyYQhmA1V6dyTRiQ4YAc31zOo2IM+xisPzeSHgw3ONY/XhYvfZ9r7W1l pNQdc2G+o4Di9NPFHQQhDw3YTRR1opJaTlRDzxYxzU6ZnUUBghxt9cwUWTpfCktkMZiPSDGd KgQBjnweV2jw9UOTxjb4LXqDjmSNkjDdQUOU69jGMUXgihvo4zhYcMX8F5gWdRtMR7DzW/YE BgVcyxNkMIXoY1aYj6npHYiNQesQlqjU6azjbH70/SXKM5tNRplgW8TNprMDuntdvV9wNkFs 9TyM02V5aWxFfI42+aivc4KEw69SE9KXwC7FSf5wXzuTot97N9Phj/Z3+jx443jo2NR34XgF 89cct7wJMjOF7bBefo0fPPZQuIma0Zym71cP61OP/i11ahNye6HGKfxGCOcs5wW9kRQEk8P9 M/k2wt3mt/fCQnuP/mWutNPt95w9wSsUyATLmtNrwccz63XOwU0EVcufkQEQAOfX3n0g0fZz Bgm/S2zF/kxQKCEKP8ID+Vz8sy2GpDvveBq4H2Y34XWsT1zLJdvqPI4af4ZSMxuerWjXbVWb T6d4odQIG0fKx4F8NccDqbgHeZRNajXeeJ3R7gAzvWvQNLz4piHrO/B4tf8svmRBL0ZB5P5A 2uhdwLU3NZuK22zpNn4is87BPWF8HhY0L5fafgDMOqnf4guJVJPYNPhUFzXUbPqOKOkL8ojk CXxkOFHAbjstSK5Ca3fKquY3rdX3DNo+EL7FvAiw1mUtS+5GeYE+RMnDCsVFm/C7kY8c2d0G NWkB9pJM5+mnIoFNxy7YBcldYATVeOHoY4LyaUWNnAvFYWp08dHWfZo9WCiJMuTfgtH9tc75 7QanMVdPt6fDK8UUXIBLQ2TWr/sQKE9xtFuEmoQGlE1l6bGaDnnMLcYu+Asp3kDT0w4zYGsx 5r6XQVRH4+5N6eHZiaeYtFOujp5n+pjBaQK7wUUjDilPQ5QMzIuCL4YjVoylWiBNknvQWBXS lQCWmavOT9sttGQXdPCC5ynI+1ymZC1ORZKANLnRAb0NH/UCzcsstw2TAkFnMEbo9Zu9w7Kv AxBQXWeXhJI9XQssfrf4Gusdqx8nPEpfOqCtbbwJMATbHyqLt7/oz/5deGuwxgb65pWIzufa N7eop7uh+6bezi+rugUI+w6DABEBAAHCwXwEGAEIACYCGwwWIQQb2cqtc1xMOkYN/MpN3hD3 AP+DWgUCXw7HsgUJEqkpoQAKCRBN3hD3AP+DWrrpD/4qS3dyVRxDcDHIlmguXjC1Q5tZTwNB boaBTPHSy/Nksu0eY7x6HfQJ3xajVH32Ms6t1trDQmPx2iP5+7iDsb7OKAb5eOS8h+BEBDeq 3ecsQDv0fFJOA9ag5O3LLNk+3x3q7e0uo06XMaY7UHS341ozXUUI7wC7iKfoUTv03iO9El5f XpNMx/YrIMduZ2+nd9Di7o5+KIwlb2mAB9sTNHdMrXesX8eBL6T9b+MZJk+mZuPxKNVfEQMQ a5SxUEADIPQTPNvBewdeI80yeOCrN+Zzwy/Mrx9EPeu59Y5vSJOx/z6OUImD/GhX7Xvkt3kq Er5KTrJz3++B6SH9pum9PuoE/k+nntJkNMmQpR4MCBaV/J9gIOPGodDKnjdng+mXliF3Ptu6 3oxc2RCyGzTlxyMwuc2U5Q7KtUNTdDe8T0uE+9b8BLMVQDDfJjqY0VVqSUwImzTDLX9S4g/8 kC4HRcclk8hpyhY2jKGluZO0awwTIMgVEzmTyBphDg/Gx7dZU1Xf8HFuE+UZ5UDHDTnwgv7E th6RC9+WrhDNspZ9fJjKWRbveQgUFCpe1sa77LAw+XFrKmBHXp9ZVIe90RMe2tRL06BGiRZr jPrnvUsUUsjRoRNJjKKA/REq+sAnhkNPPZ/NNMjaZ5b8Tovi8C0tmxiCHaQYqj7G2rgnT0kt WNyWQQ== Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <679a144a-db47-4d05-bbf7-b6a0514f5ed0@arm.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Stat-Signature: kemrrww1px3ymidiesjbod83ibhgpim4 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam10 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: CA63518004F X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1701086475-67234 X-HE-Meta: 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 s21YKgPn 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 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 27.11.23 12:56, Ryan Roberts wrote: > On 24/11/2023 18:14, Barry Song wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 10:55 PM Steven Price wrote: >>> >>> On 24/11/2023 09:01, Ryan Roberts wrote: >>>> On 24/11/2023 08:55, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>> On 24.11.23 02:35, Barry Song wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 11:57 PM Ryan Roberts wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 20/11/2023 09:11, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>>>>> On 17.11.23 19:41, Barry Song wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 7:28 PM David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 17.11.23 01:15, Barry Song wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 7:47 AM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 5:36 PM David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15.11.23 21:49, Barry Song wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:16 PM David Hildenbrand >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14.11.23 02:43, Barry Song wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This patch makes MTE tags saving and restoring support large folios, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then we don't need to split them into base pages for swapping out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on ARM64 SoCs with MTE. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arch_prepare_to_swap() should take folio rather than page as parameter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because we support THP swap-out as a whole. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile, arch_swap_restore() should use page parameter rather than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> folio as swap-in always works at the granularity of base pages right >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... but then we always have order-0 folios and can pass a folio, or what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> am I missing? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi David, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you missed the discussion here: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAGsJ_4yXjex8txgEGt7+WMKp4uDQTn-fR06ijv4Ac68MkhjMDw@mail.gmail.com/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAGsJ_4xmBAcApyK8NgVQeX_Znp5e8D4fbbhGguOkNzmh1Veocg@mail.gmail.com/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay, so you want to handle the refault-from-swapcache case where you >>>>>>>>>>>>> get a >>>>>>>>>>>>> large folio. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I was mislead by your "folio as swap-in always works at the granularity of >>>>>>>>>>>>> base pages right now" comment. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> What you actually wanted to say is "While we always swap in small >>>>>>>>>>>>> folios, we >>>>>>>>>>>>> might refault large folios from the swapcache, and we only want to restore >>>>>>>>>>>>> the tags for the page of the large folio we are faulting on." >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But, I do if we can't simply restore the tags for the whole thing at once >>>>>>>>>>>>> at make the interface page-free? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me elaborate: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IIRC, if we have a large folio in the swapcache, the swap >>>>>>>>>>>>> entries/offset are >>>>>>>>>>>>> contiguous. If you know you are faulting on page[1] of the folio with a >>>>>>>>>>>>> given swap offset, you can calculate the swap offset for page[0] simply by >>>>>>>>>>>>> subtracting from the offset. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> See page_swap_entry() on how we perform this calculation. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So you can simply pass the large folio and the swap entry corresponding >>>>>>>>>>>>> to the first page of the large folio, and restore all tags at once. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So the interface would be >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> arch_prepare_to_swap(struct folio *folio); >>>>>>>>>>>>> void arch_swap_restore(struct page *folio, swp_entry_t start_entry); >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sorry if that was also already discussed. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This has been discussed. Steven, Ryan and I all don't think this is a good >>>>>>>>>>>> option. in case we have a large folio with 16 basepages, as do_swap_page >>>>>>>>>>>> can only map one base page for each page fault, that means we have >>>>>>>>>>>> to restore 16(tags we restore in each page fault) * 16(the times of page >>>>>>>>>>>> faults) >>>>>>>>>>>> for this large folio. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and still the worst thing is the page fault in the Nth PTE of large folio >>>>>>>>>>>> might free swap entry as that swap has been in. >>>>>>>>>>>> do_swap_page() >>>>>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>>>> /* >>>>>>>>>>>> * Remove the swap entry and conditionally try to free up the >>>>>>>>>>>> swapcache. >>>>>>>>>>>> * We're already holding a reference on the page but haven't >>>>>>>>>>>> mapped it >>>>>>>>>>>> * yet. >>>>>>>>>>>> */ >>>>>>>>>>>> swap_free(entry); >>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> So in the page faults other than N, I mean 0~N-1 and N+1 to 15, you might >>>>>>>>>>>> access >>>>>>>>>>>> a freed tag. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> And David, one more information is that to keep the parameter of >>>>>>>>>>> arch_swap_restore() unchanged as folio, >>>>>>>>>>> i actually tried an ugly approach in rfc v2: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +void arch_swap_restore(swp_entry_t entry, struct folio *folio) >>>>>>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>>>>>> + if (system_supports_mte()) { >>>>>>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>>>>>> + * We don't support large folios swap in as whole yet, but >>>>>>>>>>> + * we can hit a large folio which is still in swapcache >>>>>>>>>>> + * after those related processes' PTEs have been unmapped >>>>>>>>>>> + * but before the swapcache folio is dropped, in this case, >>>>>>>>>>> + * we need to find the exact page which "entry" is mapping >>>>>>>>>>> + * to. If we are not hitting swapcache, this folio won't be >>>>>>>>>>> + * large >>>>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>>>> + struct page *page = folio_file_page(folio, swp_offset(entry)); >>>>>>>>>>> + mte_restore_tags(entry, page); >>>>>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>>>>> +} >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> And obviously everybody in the discussion hated it :-) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can relate :D >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> i feel the only way to keep API unchanged using folio is that we >>>>>>>>>>> support restoring PTEs >>>>>>>>>>> all together for the whole large folio and we support the swap-in of >>>>>>>>>>> large folios. This is >>>>>>>>>>> in my list to do, I will send a patchset based on Ryan's large anon >>>>>>>>>>> folios series after a >>>>>>>>>>> while. till that is really done, it seems using page rather than folio >>>>>>>>>>> is a better choice. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think just restoring all tags and remembering for a large folio that >>>>>>>>>> they have been restored might be the low hanging fruit. But as always, >>>>>>>>>> devil is in the detail :) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi David, >>>>>>>>> thanks for all your suggestions though my feeling is this is too complex and >>>>>>>>> is not worth it for at least three reasons. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Fair enough. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 1. In multi-thread and particularly multi-processes, we need some locks to >>>>>>>>> protect and help know if one process is the first one to restore tags and if >>>>>>>>> someone else is restoring tags when one process wants to restore. there >>>>>>>>> is not this kind of fine-grained lock at all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We surely always hold the folio lock on swapin/swapout, no? So when these >>>>>>>> functions are called. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So that might just work already -- unless I am missing something important. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We already have a page flag that we use to mark the page as having had its mte >>>>>>> state associated; PG_mte_tagged. This is currently per-page (and IIUC, Matthew >>>>>>> has been working to remove as many per-page flags as possible). Couldn't we just >>>>>>> make arch_swap_restore() take a folio, restore the tags for *all* the pages and >>>>>>> repurpose that flag to be per-folio (so head page only)? It looks like the the >>>>>>> mte code already manages all the serialization requirements too. Then >>>>>>> arch_swap_restore() can just exit early if it sees the flag is already set on >>>>>>> the folio. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One (probably nonsense) concern that just sprung to mind about having MTE work >>>>>>> with large folios in general; is it possible that user space could cause a large >>>>>>> anon folio to be allocated (THP), then later mark *part* of it to be tagged with >>>>>>> MTE? In this case you would need to apply tags to part of the folio only. >>>>>>> Although I have a vague recollection that any MTE areas have to be marked at >>>>>>> mmap time and therefore this type of thing is impossible? >>>>>> >>>>>> right, we might need to consider only a part of folio needs to be >>>>>> mapped and restored MTE tags. >>>>>> do_swap_page() can have a chance to hit a large folio but it only >>>>>> needs to fault-in a page. >>>>>> >>>>>> A case can be quite simple as below, >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. anon folio shared by process A and B >>>>>> 2. add_to_swap() as a large folio; >>>>>> 3. try to unmap A and B; >>>>>> 4. after A is unmapped(ptes become swap entries), we do a >>>>>> MADV_DONTNEED on a part of the folio. this can >>>>>> happen very easily as userspace is still working in 4KB level; >>>>>> userspace heap management can free an >>>>>> basepage area by MADV_DONTNEED; >>>>>> madvise(address, MADV_DONTNEED, 4KB); >>>>>> 5. A refault on address + 8KB, we will hit large folio in >>>>>> do_swap_page() but we will only need to map >>>>>> one basepage, we will never need this DONTNEEDed in process A. >>>>>> >>>>>> another more complicated case can be mprotect and munmap a part of >>>>>> large folios. since userspace >>>>>> has no idea of large folios in their mind, they can do all strange >>>>>> things. are we sure in all cases, >>>>>> large folios have been splitted into small folios? >>>> >>>> I don;'t think these examples you cite are problematic. Although user space >>>> thinks about things in 4K pages, the kernel does things in units of folios. So a >>>> folio is either fully swapped out or not swapped out at all. MTE tags can be >>>> saved/restored per folio, even if only part of that folio ends up being mapped >>>> back into user space. >> >> I am not so optimistic :-) >> >> but zap_pte_range() due to DONTNEED on a part of swapped-out folio can >> free a part of swap >> entries? thus, free a part of MTE tags in a folio? >> after process's large folios are swapped out, all PTEs in a large >> folio become swap >> entries, but DONTNEED on a part of this area will only set a part of >> swap entries to >> PTE_NONE, thus decrease the swapcount of this part? >> >> zap_pte_range >> -> >> entry = pte_to_swp_entry >> -> free_swap_and_cache(entry) >> -> mte tags invalidate > > OK I see what you mean. > > Just trying to summarize this, I think there are 2 questions behind all this: > > 1) Can we save/restore MTE tags on at the granularity of a folio? > > I think the answer is no; we can enable MTE on a individual pages within a folio > with mprotect, and we can throw away tags on individual pages as you describe > above. So we have to continue to handle tags per-page. Can you enlighten me why the scheme proposed by Steven doesn't work? I mean, having a mixture of tagged vs. untagged is assumed to be the corner case, right? -- Cheers, David / dhildenb