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: <04efd5eb-06c2-d449-8427-d7c30df962d1@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jul 2023 11:32:40 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.12.0
Content-Language: en-US
To:     "Yin, Fengwei" <fengwei.yin@intel.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        yuzhao@google.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, shy828301@gmail.com,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org
References: <20230707165221.4076590-1-fengwei.yin@intel.com>
 <ZKhK1Ic1KCdOLRYm@casper.infradead.org>
 <4bb39d6e-a324-0d85-7d44-8e8a37a1cfec@redhat.com>
 <ZKhiGLpIWi5Z2WnY@casper.infradead.org>
 <436cd29f-44a6-7636-5015-377051942137@intel.com>
 <ZKjfwYWh/n/LbTZv@casper.infradead.org>
 <676ce1b3-6c72-011e-3a4f-723945db3d31@intel.com>
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] support large folio for mlock
In-Reply-To: <676ce1b3-6c72-011e-3a4f-723945db3d31@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 09.07.23 15:25, Yin, Fengwei wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/8/2023 12:02 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> I would be tempted to allocate memory & copy to the new mlocked VMA.
>> The old folio will go on the deferred_list and be split later, or its
>> valid parts will be written to swap and then it can be freed.
> If the large folio splitting failure is because of GUP pages, can we
> do copy here?
> 
> Let's say, if the GUP page is target of DMA operation and DMA operation
> is ongoing. We allocated a new page and copy GUP page content to the
> new page, the data in the new page can be corrupted.

No, we may only replace anon pages that are flagged as maybe shared 
(!PageAnonExclusive). We must not replace pages that are exclusive 
(PageAnonExclusive) unless we first try marking them maybe shared. 
Clearing will fail if the page maybe pinned.

page_try_share_anon_rmap() implements the clearing logic, taking care of 
synchronizing against concurrent GUP-fast.

There are some additional nasty details regarding O_DIRECT. But once it 
completely switched from using FOLL_GET to properly using FOLL_PIN (a 
lot of that conversion already happened IIRC), we're fine in that regard.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb