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;
Date:   Thu, 18 Aug 2022 13:57:17 +0200
From:   Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     "Wang, Haiyue" <haiyue.wang@intel.com>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "david@redhat.com" <david@redhat.com>,
        "apopple@nvidia.com" <apopple@nvidia.com>,
        "linmiaohe@huawei.com" <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
        "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
        "songmuchun@bytedance.com" <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
        "naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev" <naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev>,
        "alex.sierra@amd.com" <alex.sierra@amd.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] mm: migration: fix the FOLL_GET failure on
 following huge page
Message-ID: <20220818135717.609eef8a@thinkpad>
In-Reply-To: <20220818135149.7b043a58@thinkpad>
References: <20220812084921.409142-1-haiyue.wang@intel.com>
        <20220816022102.582865-1-haiyue.wang@intel.com>
        <20220816022102.582865-2-haiyue.wang@intel.com>
        <20220816175838.211a1b1e85bc68c439101995@linux-foundation.org>
        <BYAPR11MB3495F747CBF95E079E8FC8A5F76A9@BYAPR11MB3495.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
        <20220816224322.33e0dfbcbf522fcdc2026f0e@linux-foundation.org>
        <20220818135149.7b043a58@thinkpad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 13:51:49 +0200
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:43:22 -0700
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>=20
> > On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:31:37 +0000 "Wang, Haiyue" <haiyue.wang@intel.co=
m> wrote:
> >=20
> > > > >  		}
> > > >=20
> > > > I would be better to fix this for real at those three client code s=
ites?
> > >=20
> > > Then 5.19 will break for a while to wait for the final BIG patch ?
> >=20
> > If that's the proposal then your [1/2] should have had a cc:stable and
> > changelog words describing the plan for 6.0.
> >=20
> > But before we do that I'd like to see at least a prototype of the final
> > fixes to s390 and hugetlb, so we can assess those as preferable for
> > backporting.  I don't think they'll be terribly intrusive or risky?
> >=20
>=20
> The private follow_huge_pud() for s390 is just some leftover, and the
> only reason is / was that the generic version was using pte_page()
> instead of pud_page(), which would not work for s390. See also commit
> 97534127012f ("mm/hugetlb: use pmd_page() in follow_huge_pmd()").
>=20
> Since commit 3a194f3f8ad01 ("mm/hugetlb: make pud_huge() and
> follow_huge_pud() aware of non-present pud entry") made
> follow_huge_pud() behave similar to follow_huge_pmd(), in particular
> also adding pud_page(), we can now switch to the generic version.
>=20
> Note that we cannot support migration / hwpoison for hugetlb or THP,
> because of different layout for PTE and PMD/PUD on s390. The generic
> swp_entry functions all require proper PTEs, which wouldn't work on
> PMD/PUD entries. In theory, at least for hugetlb, due to the "fake
> PTE" conversion logic in huge_ptep_get(), we might be able to also
> fake swp_entries, but the other problem is that we do not have enough
> free bits in the PMD/PUD, so there probably will never be migration
> support for huge pages on s390.
>=20
> Anyway, that should not matter wrt to switching to the generic
> follow_huge_pud(), because is_hugetlb_entry_migration() should always
> return false, and no special change to pud_huge() check should be
> needed like on x86.

=46rom ce0150cd6f80425c702ccdc4cd8a511c47e99b67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 13:19:23 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] s390/hugetlb: switch to generic version of follow_huge_pud=
()

When pud-sized hugepages were introduced for s390, the generic version
of follow_huge_pud() was using pte_page() instead of pud_page(). This
would be wrong for s390, see also commit 97534127012f ("mm/hugetlb: use
pmd_page() in follow_huge_pmd()"). Therefore, and probably because not
all archs were supporting pud_page() at that time, a private version of
follow_huge_pud() was added for s390, correctly using pud_page().

Since commit 3a194f3f8ad01 ("mm/hugetlb: make pud_huge() and
follow_huge_pud() aware of non-present pud entry"), the generic version
of follow_huge_pud() is now also using pud_page(), and in general
behaves similar to follow_huge_pmd().

Therefore we can now switch to the generic version and get rid of the
s390-specific follow_huge_pud().

Signed-off-by: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c | 10 ----------
 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c
index 10e51ef9c79a..c299a18273ff 100644
--- a/arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c
+++ b/arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c
@@ -237,16 +237,6 @@ int pud_huge(pud_t pud)
 	return pud_large(pud);
 }
=20
-struct page *
-follow_huge_pud(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long address,
-		pud_t *pud, int flags)
-{
-	if (flags & FOLL_GET)
-		return NULL;
-
-	return pud_page(*pud) + ((address & ~PUD_MASK) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
-}
-
 bool __init arch_hugetlb_valid_size(unsigned long size)
 {
 	if (MACHINE_HAS_EDAT1 && size =3D=3D PMD_SIZE)
--=20
2.34.1