From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, clm@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
willy@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/15] mm/filemap: add read support for RWF_UNCACHED
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 18:29:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <j3ob6sbdi4aeiomhnleyic3lyig6oglk4mynibczhqjxbhhb2n@2hsnsn3mxyxq> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9f86d417-9ae7-466e-a48f-27c447bb706d@kernel.dk>
On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 08:57:17AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/11/24 8:51 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 08:31:28AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 11/11/24 8:25 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 07:12:35AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>>> On 11/11/24 2:15 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >>>>>> @@ -2706,8 +2712,16 @@ ssize_t filemap_read(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>> put_folios:
> >>>>>> - for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(&fbatch); i++)
> >>>>>> - folio_put(fbatch.folios[i]);
> >>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(&fbatch); i++) {
> >>>>>> + struct folio *folio = fbatch.folios[i];
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> + if (folio_test_uncached(folio)) {
> >>>>>> + folio_lock(folio);
> >>>>>> + invalidate_complete_folio2(mapping, folio, 0);
> >>>>>> + folio_unlock(folio);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am not sure it is safe. What happens if it races with page fault?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The only current caller of invalidate_complete_folio2() unmaps the folio
> >>>>> explicitly before calling it. And folio lock prevents re-faulting.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think we need to give up PG_uncached if we see folio_mapped(). And maybe
> >>>>> also mark the page accessed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ok thanks, let me take a look at that and create a test case that
> >>>> exercises that explicitly.
> >>>
> >>> It might be worth generalizing it to clearing PG_uncached for any page cache
> >>> lookups that don't come from RWF_UNCACHED.
> >>
> >> We can do that - you mean at lookup time? Eg have __filemap_get_folio()
> >> do:
> >>
> >> if (folio_test_uncached(folio) && !(fgp_flags & FGP_UNCACHED))
> >> folio_clear_uncached(folio);
> >>
> >> or do you want this logic just in filemap_read()? Arguably it should
> >> already clear it in the quoted code above, regardless, eg:
> >>
> >> if (folio_test_uncached(folio)) {
> >> folio_lock(folio);
> >> invalidate_complete_folio2(mapping, folio, 0);
> >> folio_clear_uncached(folio);
> >> folio_unlock(folio);
> >> }
> >>
> >> in case invalidation fails.
> >
> > The point is to leave the folio in page cache if there's a
> > non-RWF_UNCACHED user of it.
>
> Right. The uncached flag should be ephemeral, hitting it should be
> relatively rare. But if it does happen, yeah we should leave the page in
> cache.
>
> > Putting the check in __filemap_get_folio() sounds reasonable.
>
> OK will do.
>
> > But I am not 100% sure it would be enough to never get PG_uncached mapped.
> > Will think about it more.
>
> Thanks!
>
> > Anyway, I think we need BUG_ON(folio_mapped(folio)) inside
> > invalidate_complete_folio2().
>
> Isn't that a bit rough? Maybe just a:
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_mapped(folio)))
> return;
>
> would do? I'm happy to do either one, let me know what you prefer.
I suggested BUG_ON() because current caller has it. But, yeah, WARN() is
good enough.
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-11 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-10 15:27 [PATCHSET v2 0/15] Uncached buffered IO Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:27 ` [PATCH 01/15] mm/filemap: change filemap_create_folio() to take a struct kiocb Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:27 ` [PATCH 02/15] mm/readahead: add folio allocation helper Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:27 ` [PATCH 03/15] mm: add PG_uncached page flag Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:27 ` [PATCH 04/15] mm/readahead: add readahead_control->uncached member Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:27 ` [PATCH 05/15] mm/filemap: use page_cache_sync_ra() to kick off read-ahead Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:27 ` [PATCH 06/15] mm/truncate: make invalidate_complete_folio2() public Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:27 ` [PATCH 07/15] fs: add RWF_UNCACHED iocb and FOP_UNCACHED file_operations flag Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 08/15] mm/filemap: add read support for RWF_UNCACHED Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 9:15 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2024-11-11 14:12 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 15:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-11 15:17 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 17:09 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 23:42 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-12 5:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-12 15:14 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-12 16:39 ` Brian Foster
2024-11-12 17:06 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-12 17:19 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-12 18:44 ` Brian Foster
2024-11-12 19:08 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-12 19:39 ` Brian Foster
2024-11-12 19:45 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-12 20:21 ` Brian Foster
2024-11-12 20:25 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-13 14:07 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 15:25 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2024-11-11 15:31 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 15:51 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2024-11-11 15:57 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 16:29 ` Kirill A. Shutemov [this message]
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 09/15] mm/filemap: drop uncached pages when writeback completes Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 9:17 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 10/15] mm/filemap: make buffered writes work with RWF_UNCACHED Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 11/15] mm: add FGP_UNCACHED folio creation flag Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 12/15] ext4: add RWF_UNCACHED write support Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 13/15] iomap: make buffered writes work with RWF_UNCACHED Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 14/15] xfs: punt uncached write completions to the completion wq Jens Axboe
2024-11-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 15/15] xfs: flag as supporting FOP_UNCACHED Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 15:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-11 15:33 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 17:25 ` [PATCHSET v2 0/15] Uncached buffered IO Matthew Wilcox
2024-11-11 17:39 ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-11 21:24 ` Yu Zhao
2024-11-11 21:48 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-11-11 22:07 ` Yu Zhao
2024-11-20 23:11 ` Yuanchu Xie
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=j3ob6sbdi4aeiomhnleyic3lyig6oglk4mynibczhqjxbhhb2n@2hsnsn3mxyxq \
--to=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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