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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Free user PTE page table pages
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, 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, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        songmuchun@bytedance.com
References: <20210819031858.98043-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
 <5b9348fc-95fe-5be2-e9df-7c906e0c9b81@redhat.com>
 <41ceeec1-52c4-4e99-201c-e1e05b2afbbc@bytedance.com>
 <20210915145933.GH3544071@ziepe.ca>
From:   Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Message-ID: <d33a4349-a228-f98a-ab14-e221bf80dd4a@bytedance.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Sep 2021 13:32:17 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210915145933.GH3544071@ziepe.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 9/15/21 10:59 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 10:52:40PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote:
>> I am going to split this patch series as follows:
>>
>> 1. Introduce the new dummy APIs, which is an empty implementation.
>>     But I will explain its semantics.
>> 2. Merge #6, #7 and #8, and call these dummy APIs in any necessary
>>     location, and split some special cases into single patches, such as
>>     pagefault and gup, etc. So that we can explain in more detail the
>>     concurrency in these cases. For example, we don't need to hold any
>>     pte_refcount in the fast path in gup on the x86_64 platform. Because
>>     the PTE page can't be freed after the local CPU interrupt is closed
>>     in the fast path in gup.
>> 3. Introduce CONFIG_FREE_USER_PTE and implement these empty dummy APIs.
>> 4. Add a description document.
>>
>> And I try to add a function that combines pte_offset_map() and
>> pte_try_get(). Maybe the func name is pte_try_map() recommended by
>> Jason, or keep the pte_offset_map() unchanged?
> 
> It is part of the transformation, add a
> pte_try_map()/pte_undo_try_map() and replace all the pte_offset_map()
> callsites that can use the new API with it. The idea was that try_map
> would incorporate the pmd_trans_unstable/etc mess so searching for
> trans_unstable is a good place to start finding candidates. Some are
> simple, some are tricky.

Yes, I will search pte_offset_map()/pmd_trans_unstable/etc, and then 
analyze the specific situation.

> 
> When you get to step 3 you just change pte_try_map() and the callsites
> don't need changing.
> 
> Jason
> 

Thanks,
Qi