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, 1 Jun 2023 15:57:51 +0200
From:   Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
        Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
        Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
        SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        Zack Rusin <zackr@vmware.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
        Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
        Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] powerpc: add pte_free_defer() for pgtables
 sharing page
Message-ID: <20230601155751.7c949ca4@thinkpad-T15>
In-Reply-To: <a8df11d-55ae-64bc-edcb-d383a7a941ea@google.com>
References: <35e983f5-7ed3-b310-d949-9ae8b130cdab@google.com>
        <28eb289f-ea2c-8eb9-63bb-9f7d7b9ccc11@google.com>
        <ZHSwWgLWaEd+zi/g@casper.infradead.org>
        <a8df11d-55ae-64bc-edcb-d383a7a941ea@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 29 May 2023 07:36:40 -0700 (PDT)
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 29 May 2023, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 11:20:21PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:  
> > > +void pte_free_defer(struct mm_struct *mm, pgtable_t pgtable)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct page *page;
> > > +
> > > +	page = virt_to_page(pgtable);
> > > +	call_rcu(&page->rcu_head, pte_free_now);
> > > +}  
> > 
> > This can't be safe (on ppc).  IIRC you might have up to 16x4k page
> > tables sharing one 64kB page.  So if you have two page tables from the
> > same page being defer-freed simultaneously, you'll reuse the rcu_head
> > and I cannot imagine things go well from that point.  
> 
> Oh yes, of course, thanks for catching that so quickly.
> So my s390 and sparc implementations will be equally broken.
> 
> > 
> > I have no idea how to solve this problem.  
> 
> I do: I'll have to go back to the more complicated implementation we
> actually ran with on powerpc - I was thinking those complications just
> related to deposit/withdraw matters, forgetting the one-rcu_head issue.
> 
> It uses large (0x10000) increments of the page refcount, avoiding
> call_rcu() when already active.
> 
> It's not a complication I had wanted to explain or test for now,
> but we shall have to.  Should apply equally well to sparc, but s390
> more of a problem, since s390 already has its own refcount cleverness.

Yes, we have 2 pagetables in one 4K page, which could result in same
rcu_head reuse. It might be possible to use the cleverness from our
page_table_free() function, e.g. to only do the call_rcu() once, for
the case where both 2K pagetable fragments become unused, similar to
how we decide when to actually call __free_page().

However, it might be much worse, and page->rcu_head from a pagetable
page cannot be used at all for s390, because we also use page->lru
to keep our list of free 2K pagetable fragments. I always get confused
by struct page unions, so not completely sure, but it seems to me that
page->rcu_head would overlay with page->lru, right?