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: <57f7576b-542b-6ec0-fc5b-5a8c3bed5868@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:29:37 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.6.0
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>,
        Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        kernel@collabora.com, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        Paul Gofman <pgofman@codeweavers.com>
References: <20220725142048.30450-1-peterx@redhat.com>
 <20220725142048.30450-2-peterx@redhat.com>
 <b75653b8-5264-ca03-bf5c-671e07e7fdd8@collabora.com> <Y3gRy8pUiYWFGqcI@x1n>
 <a9984aa6-41bc-17c3-b564-87b997c0f2d0@collabora.com> <Y3vq18eTOE0e7I1+@x1n>
 <e3c26b56-5458-eb25-c753-fc4c058ba1b1@collabora.com>
 <40cc5f89-fa10-e107-671e-84bdcf7a4430@collabora.com>
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mm/mprotect: Fix soft-dirty check in
 can_change_pte_writable()
In-Reply-To: <40cc5f89-fa10-e107-671e-84bdcf7a4430@collabora.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 28.12.22 15:14, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> On 12/19/22 5:19 PM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> Addition of vma_soft_dirty_enabled() has tinkered with the soft-dirty PTE
>> bit status setting. The internal behavior has changed. The test case was
>> shared by David
>> (https://lore.kernel.org/all/bfcae708-db21-04b4-0bbe-712badd03071@redhat.com/).
>> The explanation is as following:
>>
>> _Before_ addition of this patch(76aefad628aae),
>> m = mmap(2 pages)
>> clear_softdirty()
>> mremap(m + pag_size)
>> mprotect(READ)
>> mprotect(READ | WRITE);
>> memset(m)
>> After memset(),
>> 			PAGE-1		PAGE-2
>> VM_SOFTDIRTY		set		set
>> PTE softdirty flag	set		set
>> /proc//pagemap view	set		set
>>
>>
>> _After_ addition of this patch(76aefad628aae)
>> m = mmap(2 pages)
>> clear_softdirty()
>> mremap(m + page_size)
>> mprotect(READ)
>> mprotect(READ | WRITE);
>> memset(m)
>> After memset(),
>> 			PAGE-1		PAGE-2
>> VM_SOFTDIRTY		set		set
>> PTE softdirty flag	*not set*	set
>> /proc//pagemap view	set		set
>>
>> The user's point of view hasn't changed. But internally after this patch,
>> the soft-dirty tracking in PTEs gets turn off if VM_SOFTDIRTY is set. The
>> soft-dirty tracking in the PTEs shouldn't be just turned off when mprotect
>> is used. Why? Because soft-dirty tracking in the PTEs is always enabled
>> regardless of VM_SOFTDIRTY is set or not. Example:
>>
>> m = mem(2 pages)
>> At this point:
>> 			PAGE-1		PAGE-2
>> VM_SOFTDIRTY		set		set
>> PTE softdirty flag	not set		not set
>> /proc//pagemap view	set		set
>> memset(m)
>> At this point:
>> 			PAGE-1		PAGE-2
>> VM_SOFTDIRTY		set		set
>> PTE softdirty flag	set		set
>> /proc//pagemap view	set		set
>>
>> This example proves that soft-dirty flag on the PTE is set regardless of
>> the VM_SOFTDIRTY.
> 
> Hi Andrew and Cyrill,
> 
> Peter doesn't agree with me here that this change in behavior should be
> reverted etc. Please comment.

For the records, I agree with Peter: As 76aefad628aa ("mm/mprotect: fix 
soft-dirty check in can_change_pte_writable()") documents, this patch 
fixed real problems.

/proc/pagemap works as expected right now such that we don't have an 
under-indication. Internal representation is an implementation detail.

Whatever we do, there must not be an under-indication of softdirty. That 
is the ABI guaranteed (especially for anonymous memory). "No 
over-indication" was never the ABI guarantee.

For your use case, you want to reduce over-indication. I suggested 
looked into alternatives.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb