Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Sep 2023 17:38:48 +0200
To:     Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc:     Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
        Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@sony.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] mm: vmalloc: Support multiple nodes in vread_iter
Message-ID: <ZQHXiKJbINsuqfzt@pc636>
References: <20230829081142.3619-1-urezki@gmail.com>
 <20230829081142.3619-8-urezki@gmail.com>
 <ZP6QVTQmDGx7tx1a@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
 <ZP9ZdRc4FDSH2ej4@pc636>
 <ZQGWHmESO/GpScHo@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZQGWHmESO/GpScHo@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 06:59:42PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 09/11/23 at 08:16pm, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 11:58:13AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > On 08/29/23 at 10:11am, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> > > > Extend the vread_iter() to be able to perform a sequential
> > > > reading of VAs which are spread among multiple nodes. So a
> > > > data read over the /dev/kmem correctly reflects a vmalloc
> > > > memory layout.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  mm/vmalloc.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > > >  1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > > > index 4fd4915c532d..968144c16237 100644
> > > > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> > > > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > > ......  
> > > > @@ -4057,19 +4093,15 @@ long vread_iter(struct iov_iter *iter, const char *addr, size_t count)
> > > >  
> > > >  	remains = count;
> > > >  
> > > > -	/* Hooked to node_0 so far. */
> > > > -	vn = addr_to_node(0);
> > > > -	spin_lock(&vn->busy.lock);
> > > 
> > > This could change the vread behaviour a little bit. Before, once we take
> > > vmap_area_lock, the vread will read out the content of snapshot at the
> > > moment. Now, reading out in one node's tree won't disrupt other nodes'
> > > tree accessing. Not sure if this matters when people need access
> > > /proc/kcore, e.g dynamic debugging.
> > >
> > With one big tree you anyway drop the lock after one cycle of reading.
> > As far as i see, kcore.c's read granularity is a PAGE_SIZE.
> 
> You are right, kcore.c's reading granularity is truly PAGE_SIZE.
> I don't know procfs well, still need to study the code. Then it doesn't
> matter much with the multiple nodes in vread_iter(). Sorry for the noise.
> 
> static ssize_t read_kcore_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter)
> {  
> 	......
>         start = kc_offset_to_vaddr(*fpos - data_offset);
>         if ((tsz = (PAGE_SIZE - (start & ~PAGE_MASK))) > buflen)
>                 tsz = buflen;
> 
> 	m = NULL;
>         while (buflen) {
> 	}
> 	...
> }
> 
Good. Then we are on the same page :)

Thank you!

--
Uladzislau Rezki