From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v5 01/11] mm: Dont assume page-table invariance during
 faults
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill@shutemov.name,
        ak@linux.intel.com, mhocko@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net, jack@suse.cz,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        npiggin@gmail.com, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
References: <1497635555-25679-1-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <1497635555-25679-2-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <1499411222.23251.5.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 19:48:43 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1499411222.23251.5.camel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <d719a861-d712-1876-b46c-7f9c1360196c@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1460
Lines: 36

On 07/07/2017 09:07, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-06-16 at 19:52 +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>>
>> One of the side effects of speculating on faults (without holding
>> mmap_sem) is that we can race with free_pgtables() and therefore we
>> cannot assume the page-tables will stick around.
>>
>> Remove the relyance on the pte pointer.
>              ^^ reliance
> 
> Looking at the changelog and the code the impact is not clear.
> It looks like after this patch we always assume the pte is not
> the same. What is the impact of this patch?

Hi Balbir,

In most of the case pte_unmap_same() was returning 1, which meaning that
do_swap_page() should do its processing.

So in most of the case there will be no impact.

Now regarding the case where pte_unmap_safe() was returning 0, and thus
do_swap_page return 0 too, this happens when the page has already been
swapped back. This may happen before do_swap_page() get called or while in
the call to do_swap_page(). In that later case, the check done when
swapin_readahead() returns will detect that case.

The worst case would be that a page fault is occuring on 2 threads at the
same time on the same swapped out page. In that case one thread will take
much time looping in __read_swap_cache_async(). But in the regular page
fault path, this is even worse since the thread would wait for semaphore to
be released before starting anything.

Cheers,
Laurent.