Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 5 Feb 2021 11:05:30 -0500
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Wei Zhang <wzam@amazon.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Gal Pressman <galpress@amazon.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] hugetlb: Do early cow when page pinned on src mm
Message-ID: <20210205160530.GZ6468@xz-x1>
References: <20210204145033.136755-1-peterx@redhat.com>
 <20210204145033.136755-5-peterx@redhat.com>
 <d45d4ce3-f386-708b-0f7a-4950df6721d9@oracle.com>
 <20210205014328.GW6468@xz-x1>
 <4344397d-cf08-b502-d5ff-76f19e778dfe@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4344397d-cf08-b502-d5ff-76f19e778dfe@oracle.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:11:24PM -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote:

[...]

> >>> @@ -3787,7 +3803,7 @@ int copy_hugetlb_page_range(struct mm_struct *dst, struct mm_struct *src,
> >>>  		dst_entry = huge_ptep_get(dst_pte);
> >>>  		if ((dst_pte == src_pte) || !huge_pte_none(dst_entry))
> >>>  			continue;
> >>> -
> >>> +again:
> >>>  		dst_ptl = huge_pte_lock(h, dst, dst_pte);
> >>>  		src_ptl = huge_pte_lockptr(h, src, src_pte);
> >>>  		spin_lock_nested(src_ptl, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
> > 
> > Side question: Mike, do you know why we need this lock_nested()?  Could the src
> > lock be taken due to any reason already?  It confused me when I read the chunk.
> 
> I see that it was added with commit 4647875819aa.  That was when huge pages
> used the single per-mm ptl.  Lockdep seemed to complain about taking
> &mm->page_table_lock twice.   Certainly, source and destination mm can not
> be the same.  Right?

Right, at least that's my understanding..

> I do not have the full history, but it 'looks' like
> lockdep might have been confused and this was added to keep it quiet.
> 
> BTW - Copy page range for 'normal' pages has the same spin_lock_nested().

Yes.  I'll need to take the same lock in v3, so I think I'll just follow.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu