Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/23] mm: Introduce PTE_MARKER swap entry
Date:   Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:30:33 +1000
References: <20220405014646.13522-1-peterx@redhat.com>
 <20220405014646.13522-2-peterx@redhat.com>
 <87bkx7ayfs.fsf@nvdebian.thelocal> <YlXWzf3nF+lGA5fn@xz-m1.local>
User-agent: mu4e 1.6.9; emacs 27.1
In-reply-to: <YlXWzf3nF+lGA5fn@xz-m1.local>
Message-ID: <8735ihbw6g.fsf@nvdebian.thelocal>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?eWkeK/sD07F/5j4AjlTxhjru9iAkMNJe76TTJfyEFMCYjLNnMcUNLcq/jgm8?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?DYldQP1U8JP115uosRg3zjuuLF+KVEjWcZl934k8He03iaRco19uUYAi4REc?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?AiWqL5ebkEECWh/rMF5MyTYLE5BKV0IObFCcjzqir1yD1THKl8jPGyium3+p?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?nC9YKSfvaN5nSsdYX7IsJJeoj1xrAOhf6Pizxk57y2VJ13vnjm5hiiR5agYv?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Hjqr1HUi05lDvNgu/Q4Gr4U5Mdux1XMK4ZARAiCJn5EDoavbC7ejoVXuhHjY?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?pMeVlqfb+oba8JK1nT6TSRetKZfHR2SzTHPxSrYN7dfdeoeqUvx/gLmuTwKH?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?HCRaY9rvPOBg/pJqnIXBTxPGqw4ovfDDPQEQsxntjIHW7c2lC/M4AIZriWEI?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?MVmSPqb4O2+7jpL0D+6I23oWs3PgU9+AVWR3GgBBZ5zBnM29jPEYTMy9fCw9?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Kr1tYo1W1zNKUgxZVOwUPYDVCb9jbBG8DYpt2eeQrUjBYTivdSkrAEECLcZs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?DjDsVDUJphh/azfilKXa75R7R8xGcJZswPGR8C92un+3VVJ5jPYqEkPbNJhi?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?IgtDUuuMfBjVxKPz+xlklLUBAKpS2XpGvSIJgpKxsWLlJZOhr/8eJrgpDRak?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?hJy9x+H4urCbvVC59ztujjiSM4SZ7nVg0ke4eDK/Lzk3R5ugR/JeetUUEVRD?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?yyEIXpZXSnQckMH8yhClVqK4exkVGlJb3tNkrpRZ6mJKmR86YVuBM8CSiejE?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?zyWU7NzPVm06XyOGkQ99Wpen7xKI/t9xSqkr7Mhj8VdkztRmdJvkkbIbpS8f?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?nSkEt+1qTsZDJvzMH5n/gaFa05p5T6fVbM6/AaIBLJSXp3LHwd3/ljgZmiOS?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Z/M5eST01gaf1d3LzlMz3iYGrdmKuoyQfNxM056q5NUJn/nATIHa8h6c8tNJ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ck4PGK55tCZhZslItgtoIo4LplxOZI42aJE7W2rjYoTu9MGTbQBFhaR9bSeD?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?1U4W0RMyky7Ofi1ocpSQNvT0BAWn18KqmR8IkLO0/TNEOkAzKP4QtK2W/BBp?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?K0ELaAb/3/+99pkrUz6hwSCuejEOxa56hr2XrMMmzWV1xa6sh+U0oI3Y7WPu?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ok/PWcYbOfUpS8eaGMD0xDB/lw4iQjbntZbwtkRhAFT6zx1xBfxY5COLkk2l?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?vU3PHKlE+FlksD5TlyGUKjC7TXCLRPJfKqZvt3/E60nrMhiR85/aSx4c4Kmz?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?grQrILtsyQg8eoCMv/UA+VKdYuYEju8HyiyRgGrG0bT4X6ZLKwnP0i+n22O0?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?YKfolrK7aNhdztMymUjdtWkTJrblhaXXdxQFe0VsIQXqvxAVUNw/9ya+DCBt?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?SOdLZmQn+ie09eA+7EUoFw355Xh2fKa8uIBgc8/Dg5jK937t9ptVTJcRXB7q?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?qG+swe3na+qNZOx1QPcsUMzsaXdWJNojJhdZ5O/ZlqyL5LQvoc/vbYToGCjN?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?m3p3H5ixaQ6K9dc614OVMsTb0lLsSBSeFEI6Qgy5jT3eDcCd5HCmDYpRN7Ci?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?jIZqhhLmPYGjeHXTJTzEoQVeh2y+cWjYv1wN6NTNluLeXLnYNj9nVzfS9JgY?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?COk7YWJJJe59P0HZyRRiMaOqNQZ/WIi3A1I8O/T8nCSn8bKhWjqSzs/3MCp9?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?X2Gm4JOXg7QKl34it5jrvd2Gs6GTL2c/t/BPGMZ6IvRzzVWSpqPhwKgEHHE+?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?E7FZEm2F6Q=3D=3D?=
X-OriginatorOrg: Nvidia.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ece6ac03-a639-4dac-a590-08da1cee2cd2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BYAPR12MB3176.namprd12.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Apr 2022 01:37:32.7235
 (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: njHwQqCzsxzRsCswHlVMHjW+g2nC5m7vAAeHFk5LrD4Ahtl38f7XlGeJnk8n+YieA8lhwDf0WQympAMJAEwZtQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MW3PR12MB4586
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
        DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FORGED_SPF_HELO,
        RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE,
        T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline

Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> writes:

> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 11:07:56AM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>
> Hi, Alistair,
>
>>
>> I noticed this while reviewing the next patch in the series. I think you need to
>> add CONFIG_PTE_MARKER to the below as well:
>>
>> #if defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE) || defined(CONFIG_MIGRATION) || \
>>     defined(CONFIG_DEVICE_PRIVATE)
>> static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
>> {
>> 	return swp_type(entry) >= MAX_SWAPFILES;
>> }
>> #else
>> static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
>> {
>> 	return 0;
>> }
>> #endif
>>
>> Otherwise marker entries will be treated as swap entries, which is wrong for
>> example in swapin_walk_pmd_entry() as marker entries are no longer considered
>> pte_none().
>
> Thanks for the comment, that makes sense.
>
> Instead of adding PTE_MARKER into this equation, I'm going backward and
> wondering purely on why we need to bother with non_swap_entry() at all if
> MAX_SWAPFILES is already defined with proper knowledges of all these bits.

I was going to suggest it was to help the compiler optimise the non-swap entry
code away. But I just tested and it makes no difference in .text section size
either way so I think your suggestion is good unless that isn't true for other
architecture/compiler combinations (I only tried gcc-10.2.1 and x86_64).

That's a possibility because the optimisation isn't obvious to me at least.

non_swap_entry() is equivalent to:

(entry.val >> SWP_TYPE_SHIFT) >= MAX_SWAPFILES;
(entry.val >> (BITS_PER_XA_VALUE - MAX_SWAPFILES_SHIFT)) >= (1<<5);
(entry.val >> (BITS_PER_LONG - 1 - 5)) >= (1<<5);
(entry.val >> 58) >= (1<<5);

Where entry.val is a long. So from that alone it's not obvious this could be
optimised away, because nothing there implies entry.val != (1<<63) which would
make the conditional true. But there's a lot of inlining going on in the
creation of swap entries which I didn't trace, so something must end up implying
entry.val < (1<<63).

>
> #define MAX_SWAPFILES \
> 	((1 << MAX_SWAPFILES_SHIFT) - SWP_DEVICE_NUM - \
> 	SWP_MIGRATION_NUM - SWP_HWPOISON_NUM)
>
> So, I agree with your analysis, but instead of adding PTE_MARKER, what do
> you think about we dropping that complexity as a whole (possibly with a
> standalone patch)?
>
> ---8<---
> diff --git a/include/linux/swapops.h b/include/linux/swapops.h
> index d356ab4047f7..5af852b68805 100644
> --- a/include/linux/swapops.h
> +++ b/include/linux/swapops.h
> @@ -387,18 +387,10 @@ static inline void num_poisoned_pages_inc(void)
>  }
>  #endif
>
> -#if defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE) || defined(CONFIG_MIGRATION) || \
> -    defined(CONFIG_DEVICE_PRIVATE)
>  static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
>  {
>         return swp_type(entry) >= MAX_SWAPFILES;
>  }
> -#else
> -static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
> -{
> -       return 0;
> -}
> -#endif
>
>  #endif /* CONFIG_MMU */
>  #endif /* _LINUX_SWAPOPS_H */
> ---8<---
>
> Thanks,

--=-=-=--