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:   Wed, 1 Sep 2021 10:53:14 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To:     Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
        mhocko@kernel.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, mika.penttila@nextfour.com,
        david@redhat.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        songmuchun@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] mm: free user PTE page table pages
Message-ID: <20210901135314.GA1859446@nvidia.com>
References: <20210819031858.98043-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
 <20210819031858.98043-7-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210819031858.98043-7-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?iYgy8aU8TYIsPy6hex9g7Jk+J7EGdgoavXkrC1mEvLBMHchVco2V2z1DgkEZ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?NhvGG6T+sQybN/Q9QAlVp59aCJIsKBfjiPfm2R2u24c3FamwTGM2Vfl9UVLu?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?s72V8+re8KTrm1XhzUNN23QNmZBcMUai5M2qj+SvxB9fwruyRKecoDJXU4Et?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?8weyGwJEeiKEAJwQ8G1NpOV+2FURHfjlmrsGa0QZKYCbdPCPhkhS4nbfR8Tg?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?LzNSt4QxGLJJOADZa9sM3xKEGuU/p0YZSJf4VB0lYry1soEAwKLeJYZHYNlA?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?x6ofjycv1VHLJ2yvL80F6aDtV9Ab6I9NNBJzGenzOws3skW6znsRDzamvmYO?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?T2q8JfjlwwSBrhshaJ8k7rsr60wfEwnmrOOkWMoLG0wWb+CnZPGo3H4N0MGd?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?/7oOdV94+TW8Dcqp7l91+zOad4o4GHxm4TVnBBQBnrQyjIYH3J82i7ddcteB?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?VBn4DGSn0N7/rk3nLd/NBpUqQbgpeuhf9GqWmwKADjEC5NBQviv+wJRD8kTp?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?tYH4fwh1BIAChsldIJfgxP18g/Td8uZ0UbQG3AaeQK+l09hAxXbWvarNcoxs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?5zJtzIGIs+xSY8nYpCwQIwrk+9IyIwtat/8uqi9zrBNa1DT5ig8YnLURqX5f?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?a2J5IBehO6ChxZQLaJFhPeGq33eWNuixmWdJt40UptC0D3b+YnmvaCa46GaT?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Wr3V25ok22tHogNbuGiKyd/TjGXboCgjNnzZHWD5ATbjVvZFz6z+i5VHZbXq?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?TWncdwiGDqgVEbE03ug6iBLWf9LIMYp7DC27G1UacCzqq+5osZkHx9imqFUz?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?kB2g4EurMTlixjiu0hbEN5w2xSGCba6AzUbTiwEAIaoe8bfQUMirvWk79VhJ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?OOHaxljHbklcRaMg7v2LscYrdiGGw2/AK0XRzDPOja+h3HS3vfSQZBoFfi5L?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?u+4m+VJ1UIL+uQ5d/e80vIKxXOnMyqgF2irchH7S66IbUSBABosplaazLEB0?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?OSpP2baDdwke3M1qsJTHd1CeKw8SH7FV/Cw+NfaURWkihD3p8aRZx0yp+0ah?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?EC7jvflLpcNTxsZ6Uec3exfoG9FNe6b+ZJdINguuy5YCAjm26qKXy0AUpRC4?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?31yC6nPYJlfat0/SHSWuRHlSAqfJD1JEH9xHdqYLZIAsWvZM2D2PDZhXVeoX?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?TngBdQJkrWDSdoo0S/QaYGuU4XhRrrZdsAXXWjUfmFdx5GGT9g4iRIBQKsgi?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ZkYCB8g1pNxvuZL52v8XOZVRbObfYvkEOKS3pIZe5dL4Rs5f7R3y67NTIhd3?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?wBGB2UbmMBIlnS7V9Kx+nw2M?=
X-OriginatorOrg: Nvidia.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: dbd00787-d1e4-41d9-5762-08d96d4fd883
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BL0PR12MB5506.namprd12.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2021 13:53:15.5430
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: 6XGF31JXLi7W32QtTdMEEPYeP/bMjRvuVmWLGXsATBLWRM6c0g28qFN/7Io4K0xg
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL1PR12MB5286
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 11:18:55AM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote:

> diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> index 2630ed1bb4f4..30757f3b176c 100644
> +++ b/mm/gup.c
> @@ -500,6 +500,9 @@ static struct page *follow_page_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  	if (unlikely(pmd_bad(*pmd)))
>  		return no_page_table(vma, flags);
>  
> +	if (!pte_try_get(mm, pmd))
> +		return no_page_table(vma, flags);
> +
>  	ptep = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);

This is not good on a performance path, the pte_try_get() is
locking/locking the same lock that pte_offset_map_lock() is getting.

This would be much better if the map_lock infra could manage the
refcount itself.

I'm also not really keen on adding ptl level locking to all the
currently no-lock paths. If we are doing that then the no-lock paths
should rely on the ptl for alot more of their operations and avoid the
complicatred no-lock data access we have. eg 'pte_try_get()' should
also copy the pte_t under the lock.

Also, I don't really understand how this scheme works with
get_user_pages_fast.

Currently the zap triggers a TLB invalidation which synchronizes with
GUP fast, however this only makes the ptes non-present. The purpose is
to synchronize with the struct page refcount, not a pte refcount.

With this series the non-present PTEs are freed but how does this
synchronize with gup fast to avoid a use-after-free on the pte struct
page?

I agree with David, this series needs significant splitting to be
readable and a lot more explanation in the commit messages how all the
locking is working. Eg introducing the freeing should be a single
short patch at at end with a full explanation of the locking in all
the major scenarios.

Jason