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 10:44:46 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To:     "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc:     Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
        Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>,
        huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Sierra Guiza, Alejandro (Alex)" <alex.sierra@amd.com>,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Karol Herbst <kherbst@redhat.com>,
        Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>, Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>, paulus@ozlabs.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/migrate_device.c: Copy pte dirty bit to page
Message-ID: <Yv5QXkS4Bm9pTBeG@xz-m1.local>
References: <6e77914685ede036c419fa65b6adc27f25a6c3e9.1660635033.git-series.apopple@nvidia.com>
 <CAC=cRTPGiXWjk=CYnCrhJnLx3mdkGDXZpvApo6yTbeW7+ZGajA@mail.gmail.com>
 <Yvv/eGfi3LW8WxPZ@xz-m1.local>
 <871qtfvdlw.fsf@nvdebian.thelocal>
 <YvxWUY9eafFJ27ef@xz-m1.local>
 <87o7wjtn2g.fsf@nvdebian.thelocal>
 <87tu6bbaq7.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <1D2FB37E-831B-445E-ADDC-C1D3FF0425C1@gmail.com>
 <Yv1BJKb5he3dOHdC@xz-m1.local>
 <87czcyawl6.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87czcyawl6.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 02:34:45PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> > In this specific case, the only way to do safe tlb batching in my mind is:
> >
> > 	pte_offset_map_lock();
> > 	arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode();
> >         // If any pending tlb, do it now
> >         if (mm_tlb_flush_pending())
> > 		flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end);
> >         else
> >                 flush_tlb_batched_pending();
> 
> I don't think we need the above 4 lines.  Because we will flush TLB
> before we access the pages.

Could you elaborate?

> Can you find any issue if we don't use the above 4 lines?

It seems okay to me to leave stall tlb at least within the scope of this
function. It only collects present ptes and flush propoerly for them.  I
don't quickly see any other implications to other not touched ptes - unlike
e.g. mprotect(), there's a strong barrier of not allowing further write
after mprotect() returns.

Still I don't know whether there'll be any side effect of having stall tlbs
in !present ptes because I'm not familiar enough with the private dev swap
migration code.  But I think having them will be safe, even if redundant.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu