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:   Mon, 12 Jun 2023 09:28:22 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
        mhocko@suse.com, josef@toxicpanda.com, jack@suse.cz,
        ldufour@linux.ibm.com, laurent.dufour@fr.ibm.com,
        michel@lespinasse.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, jglisse@google.com,
        vbabka@suse.cz, minchan@google.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
        punit.agrawal@bytedance.com, lstoakes@gmail.com, hdanton@sina.com,
        apopple@nvidia.com, ying.huang@intel.com, david@redhat.com,
        yuzhao@google.com, dhowells@redhat.com, hughd@google.com,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org,
        pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] mm: drop VMA lock before waiting for migration
Message-ID: <ZIcddoWjYlDXNKJA@x1n>
References: <20230609005158.2421285-1-surenb@google.com>
 <20230609005158.2421285-5-surenb@google.com>
 <ZIOOmC26qh4EXUEX@x1n>
 <CAJuCfpHKUjAwgWbxvJQDyEnneRD03p2M6247Q6=3-oOq_FL7zA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAJuCfpHKUjAwgWbxvJQDyEnneRD03p2M6247Q6=3-oOq_FL7zA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 03:30:10PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 1:42 PM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 05:51:56PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > migration_entry_wait does not need VMA lock, therefore it can be dropped
> > > before waiting. Introduce VM_FAULT_VMA_UNLOCKED to indicate that VMA
> > > lock was dropped while in handle_mm_fault().
> > > Note that once VMA lock is dropped, the VMA reference can't be used as
> > > there are no guarantees it was not freed.
> >
> > Then vma lock behaves differently from mmap read lock, am I right?  Can we
> > still make them match on behaviors, or there's reason not to do so?
> 
> I think we could match their behavior by also dropping mmap_lock here
> when fault is handled under mmap_lock (!(fault->flags &
> FAULT_FLAG_VMA_LOCK)).
> I missed the fact that VM_FAULT_COMPLETED can be used to skip dropping
> mmap_lock in do_page_fault(), so indeed, I might be able to use
> VM_FAULT_COMPLETED to skip vma_end_read(vma) for per-vma locks as well
> instead of introducing FAULT_FLAG_VMA_LOCK. I think that was your idea
> of reusing existing flags?

Yes.

I'd suggest we move this patch out of the series as it's not really part of
it on enabling swap + uffd.  It can be a separate patch and hopefully it'll
always change both vma+mmap lock cases, and with proper reasonings.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu