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;
Message-ID: <95ed1a81-ff8e-2c48-8838-4b3995af51b7@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Aug 2022 11:03:11 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:PROC FILESYSTEM" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:ABI/API" <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GENERIC INCLUDE/ASM HEADER FILES" 
        <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "open list:PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM" 
        <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>, krisman@collabora.com
Cc:     kernel@collabora.com
References: <20220726161854.276359-1-usama.anjum@collabora.com>
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add process_memwatch syscall
In-Reply-To: <20220726161854.276359-1-usama.anjum@collabora.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 26.07.22 18:18, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> Hello,

Hi,

> 
> This patch series implements a new syscall, process_memwatch. Currently,
> only the support to watch soft-dirty PTE bit is added. This syscall is
> generic to watch the memory of the process. There is enough room to add
> more operations like this to watch memory in the future.
> 
> Soft-dirty PTE bit of the memory pages can be viewed by using pagemap
> procfs file. The soft-dirty PTE bit for the memory in a process can be
> cleared by writing to the clear_refs file. This series adds features that
> weren't possible through the Proc FS interface.
> - There is no atomic get soft-dirty PTE bit status and clear operation
>   possible.

Such an interface might be easy to add, no?

> - The soft-dirty PTE bit of only a part of memory cannot be cleared.

Same.

So I'm curious why we need a new syscall for that.

> 
> Historically, soft-dirty PTE bit tracking has been used in the CRIU
> project. The Proc FS interface is enough for that as I think the process
> is frozen. We have the use case where we need to track the soft-dirty
> PTE bit for running processes. We need this tracking and clear mechanism
> of a region of memory while the process is running to emulate the
> getWriteWatch() syscall of Windows. This syscall is used by games to keep
> track of dirty pages and keep processing only the dirty pages. This
> syscall can be used by the CRIU project and other applications which
> require soft-dirty PTE bit information.
> 
> As in the current kernel there is no way to clear a part of memory (instead
> of clearing the Soft-Dirty bits for the entire processi) and get+clear
> operation cannot be performed atomically, there are other methods to mimic
> this information entirely in userspace with poor performance:
> - The mprotect syscall and SIGSEGV handler for bookkeeping
> - The userfaultfd syscall with the handler for bookkeeping

You write "poor performance". Did you actually implement a prototype
using userfaultfd-wp? Can you share numbers for comparison?

Adding an new syscall just for handling a corner case feature
(soft-dirty, which we all love, of course) needs good justification.

> 
>         long process_memwatch(int pidfd, unsigned long start, int len,
>                               unsigned int flags, void *vec, int vec_len);
> 
> This syscall can be used by the CRIU project and other applications which
> require soft-dirty PTE bit information. The following operations are
> supported in this syscall:
> - Get the pages that are soft-dirty.
> - Clear the pages which are soft-dirty.
> - The optional flag to ignore the VM_SOFTDIRTY and only track per page
> soft-dirty PTE bit

Huh, why? VM_SOFTDIRTY is an internal implementation detail and should
remain such.

VM_SOFTDIRTY translates to "all pages in this VMA are soft-dirty".

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb