From patchwork Wed Apr 7 08:42:33 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Alistair Popple X-Patchwork-Id: 12187495 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26632C43470 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 869DA61154 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:10 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 869DA61154 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=nvidia.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1928A6B0081; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 04:43:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 1699A6B0082; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 04:43:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id EFDE56B0083; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 04:43:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0226.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.226]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFAA36B0081 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 04:43:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A9518099217 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:09 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78004931298.16.53CF1F3 Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm6nam11on2082.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.223.82]) by imf07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0BA5A00039C for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:08 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=j7DSmJZDRLSS8RIL511pTMI8JsnwrMObBePhaIWjkmSdJbuSs6/xW9NKNS8AfvVnWEduxEx0BzAFr0MsCSN0xNoYqISXzLfM+EOS52yBczSXPYd8JxbFr1js3qXlDXEXPfXgotdnyzvNNAdsZ57DCFd4Oy4TiYwU4/hBNc28uHew6+rzz7HbNue62enr9wCb++LpVq9zuZFRHbComZZ40S2Be52bqNaJiukwJPNe/lEzKpTX+/uVjmFGPgbqWcYZsAPu48omUOAeWb9pndFHJs/umR/wkyAHmebR5/f1YrH5KZogmZJmZeImpNxlQxsjvndq7jr0ZJAXtSUhAK1Cbw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=y5UKUt63GWMG/q0rdwsQSKZzi5XNYK8gxkE0j7W9Ghw=; b=epbPn4asAkCcFZMsK7ld/tqdiUMruXHtTMAGL0Fws7qPJsONWgWNo1lQIy0Ptbwv6vfKN6uDJZ4Auf96z+m34VmGQdct9OZwl5Sa+ckUI6b7O5as4TnGzJSjDspUIrFTxaNZjmn9LVO5PDLFtkpx/D68UBNmPvVs4FfXGV/7MC1SidJq4WaaH0a6+/6ERyN8eAz2TNF3OdSAWj1FkfSijIGLfwRfbzs5SXSjh5rN9mENn+T/Js9xnsNECYFO/utb1xO0jkl9rrt+WLUPk+Nvh/dk9rQ7JNxGZZ9R5Z/VEZx+SzXaCAeb57usnOqwEEcdqW25l5lfLLu4jWA7ymzNlA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass (sender ip is 216.228.112.34) smtp.rcpttodomain=ffwll.ch smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass (p=none sp=none pct=100) action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=none (message not signed); arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Nvidia.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=y5UKUt63GWMG/q0rdwsQSKZzi5XNYK8gxkE0j7W9Ghw=; b=kSHk4pWjqh6FFOlPfyJ9hV7mCFkjr7lzzQH/P17ERg6rWh0rOJam6OmvF+W/YgwpvbVXrFP5Qrn9R41GJwmqnBZ/MvlnQYJ2zKLN4QClAvAH2IzGtf2drxRmiKxPNWzwl3oIMwD51ucB51UAD43/JK0TmAGNmREFA5vORQJ4jyJhSyjjEtu4lvSCruASrafLcArLuF9ORG1sY0hOBayZJ67Mwh0pn937irTxs03621Wbjl/Ic2u68UH058e8P/gijU0hdzE2zsaMSo51yQE4C+uaxHKjFqG34nXIqU62a65bbERDK8hsH4m+OBTA9znAa+viWHlDZRBlkcnBB6fFvg== Received: from BN6PR13CA0031.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:404:13e::17) by BN6PR1201MB0131.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:405:5b::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4020.16; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:06 +0000 Received: from BN8NAM11FT013.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:404:13e:cafe::96) by BN6PR13CA0031.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:404:13e::17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4020.9 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:06 +0000 X-MS-Exchange-Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 216.228.112.34) smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; ffwll.ch; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ffwll.ch; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates 216.228.112.34 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=216.228.112.34; helo=mail.nvidia.com; Received: from mail.nvidia.com (216.228.112.34) by BN8NAM11FT013.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.13.176.182) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.3999.28 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (172.20.145.6) by HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 08:43:04 +0000 From: Alistair Popple To: , , , CC: Alistair Popple , , , , , , , , , , , , Christoph Hellwig Subject: [PATCH v8 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2021 18:42:33 +1000 Message-ID: <20210407084238.20443-4-apopple@nvidia.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 In-Reply-To: <20210407084238.20443-1-apopple@nvidia.com> References: <20210407084238.20443-1-apopple@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [172.20.145.6] X-ClientProxiedBy: HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) To HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 4e18c2f3-9582-43fb-dc55-08d8f9a129cd X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: BN6PR1201MB0131: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:10000; X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:216.228.112.34;CTRY:US;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:mail.nvidia.com;PTR:schybrid03.nvidia.com;CAT:NONE;SFS:(4636009)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(346002)(396003)(36840700001)(46966006)(1076003)(356005)(186003)(2906002)(36860700001)(83380400001)(86362001)(82310400003)(16526019)(6666004)(478600001)(70586007)(426003)(70206006)(36756003)(7416002)(2616005)(7636003)(8936002)(336012)(8676002)(4326008)(110136005)(30864003)(54906003)(5660300002)(47076005)(26005)(36906005)(316002)(82740400003);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101; X-OriginatorOrg: Nvidia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Apr 2021 08:43:05.6075 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4e18c2f3-9582-43fb-dc55-08d8f9a129cd X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.112.34];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com] X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN8NAM11FT013.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN6PR1201MB0131 X-Stat-Signature: 9iqsr9yt4zid5c1pwyewe97iawwcnehd X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D0BA5A00039C Received-SPF: none (nvidia.com>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf07; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com; client-ip=40.107.223.82 X-HE-DKIM-Result: pass/pass X-HE-Tag: 1617784988-115475 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: The behaviour of try_to_unmap_one() is difficult to follow because it performs different operations based on a fairly large set of flags used in different combinations. TTU_MUNLOCK is one such flag. However it is exclusively used by try_to_munlock() which specifies no other flags. Therefore rather than overload try_to_unmap_one() with unrelated behaviour split this out into it's own function and remove the flag. Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple Reviewed-by: Ralph Campbell Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig --- v8: * Renamed try_to_munlock to page_mlock to better reflect what the function actually does. * Removed the TODO from the documentation that this patch addresses. v7: * Added Christoph's Reviewed-by v4: * Removed redundant check for VM_LOCKED --- Documentation/vm/unevictable-lru.rst | 33 ++++++++----------- include/linux/rmap.h | 3 +- mm/mlock.c | 10 +++--- mm/rmap.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++------- 4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/vm/unevictable-lru.rst b/Documentation/vm/unevictable-lru.rst index 0e1490524f53..eae3af17f2d9 100644 --- a/Documentation/vm/unevictable-lru.rst +++ b/Documentation/vm/unevictable-lru.rst @@ -389,14 +389,14 @@ mlocked, munlock_vma_page() updates that zone statistics for the number of mlocked pages. Note, however, that at this point we haven't checked whether the page is mapped by other VM_LOCKED VMAs. -We can't call try_to_munlock(), the function that walks the reverse map to +We can't call page_mlock(), the function that walks the reverse map to check for other VM_LOCKED VMAs, without first isolating the page from the LRU. -try_to_munlock() is a variant of try_to_unmap() and thus requires that the page +page_mlock() is a variant of try_to_unmap() and thus requires that the page not be on an LRU list [more on these below]. However, the call to -isolate_lru_page() could fail, in which case we couldn't try_to_munlock(). So, +isolate_lru_page() could fail, in which case we can't call page_mlock(). So, we go ahead and clear PG_mlocked up front, as this might be the only chance we -have. If we can successfully isolate the page, we go ahead and -try_to_munlock(), which will restore the PG_mlocked flag and update the zone +have. If we can successfully isolate the page, we go ahead and call +page_mlock(), which will restore the PG_mlocked flag and update the zone page statistics if it finds another VMA holding the page mlocked. If we fail to isolate the page, we'll have left a potentially mlocked page on the LRU. This is fine, because we'll catch it later if and if vmscan tries to reclaim @@ -545,31 +545,24 @@ munlock or munmap system calls, mm teardown (munlock_vma_pages_all), reclaim, holepunching, and truncation of file pages and their anonymous COWed pages. -try_to_munlock() Reverse Map Scan +page_mlock() Reverse Map Scan --------------------------------- -.. warning:: - [!] TODO/FIXME: a better name might be page_mlocked() - analogous to the - page_referenced() reverse map walker. - When munlock_vma_page() [see section :ref:`munlock()/munlockall() System Call Handling ` above] tries to munlock a page, it needs to determine whether or not the page is mapped by any VM_LOCKED VMA without actually attempting to unmap all PTEs from the page. For this purpose, the unevictable/mlock infrastructure -introduced a variant of try_to_unmap() called try_to_munlock(). +introduced a variant of try_to_unmap() called page_mlock(). -try_to_munlock() calls the same functions as try_to_unmap() for anonymous and -mapped file and KSM pages with a flag argument specifying unlock versus unmap -processing. Again, these functions walk the respective reverse maps looking -for VM_LOCKED VMAs. When such a VMA is found, as in the try_to_unmap() case, -the functions mlock the page via mlock_vma_page() and return SWAP_MLOCK. This -undoes the pre-clearing of the page's PG_mlocked done by munlock_vma_page. +page_mlock() walks the respective reverse maps looking for VM_LOCKED VMAs. When +such a VMA is found the page is mlocked via mlock_vma_page(). This undoes the +pre-clearing of the page's PG_mlocked done by munlock_vma_page. -Note that try_to_munlock()'s reverse map walk must visit every VMA in a page's +Note that page_mlock()'s reverse map walk must visit every VMA in a page's reverse map to determine that a page is NOT mapped into any VM_LOCKED VMA. However, the scan can terminate when it encounters a VM_LOCKED VMA. -Although try_to_munlock() might be called a great many times when munlocking a +Although page_mlock() might be called a great many times when munlocking a large region or tearing down a large address space that has been mlocked via mlockall(), overall this is a fairly rare event. @@ -602,7 +595,7 @@ inactive lists to the appropriate node's unevictable list. shrink_inactive_list() should only see SHM_LOCK'd pages that became SHM_LOCK'd after shrink_active_list() had moved them to the inactive list, or pages mapped into VM_LOCKED VMAs that munlock_vma_page() couldn't isolate from the LRU to -recheck via try_to_munlock(). shrink_inactive_list() won't notice the latter, +recheck via page_mlock(). shrink_inactive_list() won't notice the latter, but will pass on to shrink_page_list(). shrink_page_list() again culls obviously unevictable pages that it could diff --git a/include/linux/rmap.h b/include/linux/rmap.h index def5c62c93b3..38a746787c2f 100644 --- a/include/linux/rmap.h +++ b/include/linux/rmap.h @@ -87,7 +87,6 @@ struct anon_vma_chain { enum ttu_flags { TTU_MIGRATION = 0x1, /* migration mode */ - TTU_MUNLOCK = 0x2, /* munlock mode */ TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD = 0x4, /* split huge PMD if any */ TTU_IGNORE_MLOCK = 0x8, /* ignore mlock */ @@ -239,7 +238,7 @@ int page_mkclean(struct page *); * called in munlock()/munmap() path to check for other vmas holding * the page mlocked. */ -void try_to_munlock(struct page *); +void page_mlock(struct page *page); void remove_migration_ptes(struct page *old, struct page *new, bool locked); diff --git a/mm/mlock.c b/mm/mlock.c index f8f8cc32d03d..9b8b82cfbbff 100644 --- a/mm/mlock.c +++ b/mm/mlock.c @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ void mlock_vma_page(struct page *page) /* * Finish munlock after successful page isolation * - * Page must be locked. This is a wrapper for try_to_munlock() + * Page must be locked. This is a wrapper for page_mlock() * and putback_lru_page() with munlock accounting. */ static void __munlock_isolated_page(struct page *page) @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static void __munlock_isolated_page(struct page *page) * and we don't need to check all the other vmas. */ if (page_mapcount(page) > 1) - try_to_munlock(page); + page_mlock(page); /* Did try_to_unlock() succeed or punt? */ if (!PageMlocked(page)) @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static void __munlock_isolation_failed(struct page *page) * munlock()ed or munmap()ed, we want to check whether other vmas hold the * page locked so that we can leave it on the unevictable lru list and not * bother vmscan with it. However, to walk the page's rmap list in - * try_to_munlock() we must isolate the page from the LRU. If some other + * page_mlock() we must isolate the page from the LRU. If some other * task has removed the page from the LRU, we won't be able to do that. * So we clear the PageMlocked as we might not get another chance. If we * can't isolate the page, we leave it for putback_lru_page() and vmscan @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ unsigned int munlock_vma_page(struct page *page) { int nr_pages; - /* For try_to_munlock() and to serialize with page migration */ + /* For page_mlock() and to serialize with page migration */ BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page)); VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTail(page), page); @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ static int __mlock_posix_error_return(long retval) * * The fast path is available only for evictable pages with single mapping. * Then we can bypass the per-cpu pvec and get better performance. - * when mapcount > 1 we need try_to_munlock() which can fail. + * when mapcount > 1 we need page_mlock() which can fail. * when !page_evictable(), we need the full redo logic of putback_lru_page to * avoid leaving evictable page in unevictable list. * diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c index 977e70803ed8..f09d522725b9 100644 --- a/mm/rmap.c +++ b/mm/rmap.c @@ -1405,10 +1405,6 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct mmu_notifier_range range; enum ttu_flags flags = (enum ttu_flags)(long)arg; - /* munlock has nothing to gain from examining un-locked vmas */ - if ((flags & TTU_MUNLOCK) && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED)) - return true; - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MIGRATION) && (flags & TTU_MIGRATION) && is_zone_device_page(page) && !is_device_private_page(page)) return true; @@ -1469,8 +1465,6 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma, page_vma_mapped_walk_done(&pvmw); break; } - if (flags & TTU_MUNLOCK) - continue; } /* Unexpected PMD-mapped THP? */ @@ -1784,8 +1778,39 @@ bool try_to_unmap(struct page *page, enum ttu_flags flags) return !page_mapcount(page) ? true : false; } +static bool page_mlock_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma, + unsigned long address, void *arg) +{ + struct page_vma_mapped_walk pvmw = { + .page = page, + .vma = vma, + .address = address, + }; + + /* munlock has nothing to gain from examining un-locked vmas */ + if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED)) + return true; + + while (page_vma_mapped_walk(&pvmw)) { + /* PTE-mapped THP are never mlocked */ + if (!PageTransCompound(page)) { + /* + * Holding pte lock, we do *not* need + * mmap_lock here + */ + mlock_vma_page(page); + } + page_vma_mapped_walk_done(&pvmw); + + /* found a mlocked page, no point continuing munlock check */ + return false; + } + + return true; +} + /** - * try_to_munlock - try to munlock a page + * page_mlock - try to munlock a page * @page: the page to be munlocked * * Called from munlock code. Checks all of the VMAs mapping the page @@ -1793,11 +1818,10 @@ bool try_to_unmap(struct page *page, enum ttu_flags flags) * returned with PG_mlocked cleared if no other vmas have it mlocked. */ -void try_to_munlock(struct page *page) +void page_mlock(struct page *page) { struct rmap_walk_control rwc = { - .rmap_one = try_to_unmap_one, - .arg = (void *)TTU_MUNLOCK, + .rmap_one = page_mlock_one, .done = page_not_mapped, .anon_lock = page_lock_anon_vma_read, @@ -1849,7 +1873,7 @@ static struct anon_vma *rmap_walk_anon_lock(struct page *page, * Find all the mappings of a page using the mapping pointer and the vma chains * contained in the anon_vma struct it points to. * - * When called from try_to_munlock(), the mmap_lock of the mm containing the vma + * When called from page_mlock(), the mmap_lock of the mm containing the vma * where the page was found will be held for write. So, we won't recheck * vm_flags for that VMA. That should be OK, because that vma shouldn't be * LOCKED. @@ -1901,7 +1925,7 @@ static void rmap_walk_anon(struct page *page, struct rmap_walk_control *rwc, * Find all the mappings of a page using the mapping pointer and the vma chains * contained in the address_space struct it points to. * - * When called from try_to_munlock(), the mmap_lock of the mm containing the vma + * When called from page_mlock(), the mmap_lock of the mm containing the vma * where the page was found will be held for write. So, we won't recheck * vm_flags for that VMA. That should be OK, because that vma shouldn't be * LOCKED.