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, 27 Aug 2021 10:16:57 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To:     "Li, Zhijian" <lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc:     "lizhijian@fujitsu.com" <lizhijian@fujitsu.com>,
        "nvdimm@lists.linux.dev" <nvdimm@lists.linux.dev>,
        Yishai Hadas <yishaih@nvidia.com>,
        "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "yangx.jy@fujitsu.com" <yangx.jy@fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: RDMA/rpma + fsdax(ext4) was broken since 36f30e486d
Message-ID: <20210827131657.GI1200268@ziepe.ca>
References: <8b2514bb-1d4b-48bb-a666-85e6804fbac0@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <68169bc5-075f-8260-eedc-80fdf4b0accd@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <20210806014559.GM543798@ziepe.ca>
 <b5e6c4cd-8842-59ef-c089-2802057f3202@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <10c4bead-c778-8794-f916-80bf7ba3a56b@fujitsu.com>
 <20210827121034.GG1200268@ziepe.ca>
 <d276eeda-7f30-6c91-24cd-a40916fcc4c8@cn.fujitsu.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <d276eeda-7f30-6c91-24cd-a40916fcc4c8@cn.fujitsu.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 09:05:21PM +0800, Li, Zhijian wrote:
> 
> on 2021/8/27 20:10, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 08:15:40AM +0000, lizhijian@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > > i looked over the change-log of hmm_vma_handle_pte(), and found that before
> > > 4055062 ("mm/hmm: add missing call to hmm_pte_need_fault in HMM_PFN_SPECIAL handling")
> > > 
> > > hmm_vma_handle_pte() will not check pte_special(pte) if pte_devmap(pte) is true.
> > > 
> > > when we reached
> > > "if (pte_special(pte) && !is_zero_pfn(pte_pfn(pte))) {"
> > > the pte have already presented and its pte's flag already fulfilled the request flags.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > My question is that
> > > Per https://01.org/blogs/dave/2020/linux-consumption-x86-page-table-bits,
> > > pte_devmap(pte) and pte_special(pte) could be both true in fsdax user case, right ?
> > How? what code creates that?
> > 
> > I see:
> > 
> > insert_pfn():
> > 	/* Ok, finally just insert the thing.. */
> > 	if (pfn_t_devmap(pfn))
> > 		entry = pte_mkdevmap(pfn_t_pte(pfn, prot));
> > 	else
> > 		entry = pte_mkspecial(pfn_t_pte(pfn, prot));
> > 
> > So what code path ends up setting both bits?
> 
>  pte_mkdevmap() will set both _PAGE_SPECIAL | PAGE_DEVMAP
> 
>  395 static inline pte_t pte_mkdevmap(pte_t pte)
>  396 {
>  397         return pte_set_flags(pte, _PAGE_SPECIAL|_PAGE_DEVMAP);
>  398 }
> 
> below is a calltrace example
> 
> [  400.728559] Call Trace:
> [  400.731595] dump_stack+0x6d/0x8b
> [  400.735536] insert_pfn+0x16c/0x180
> [  400.739596] __vm_insert_mixed+0x84/0xc0
> [  400.744144] dax_iomap_pte_fault+0x845/0x870
> [  400.749089] ext4_dax_huge_fault+0x171/0x1e0
> [  400.754096] __do_fault+0x31/0xe0
> [  400.758090]  ? pmd_devmap_trans_unstable+0x37/0x90
> [  400.763541] handle_mm_fault+0x11b1/0x1680
> [  400.768260] exc_page_fault+0x2f4/0x570
> [  400.772788]  ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x8/0x30
> [  400.777539]  asm_exc_page_fault+0x1e/0x30
> 
> 
> So is my previous change reasonable ?

Yes, can you send a proper patch and include the mm mailing list?

Jason