Message ID | a9daea363991c023d0364be22a762405b6c6f5c4.1660281458.git-series.apopple@nvidia.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [1/2] mm/migrate_device.c: Copy pte dirty bit to page | expand |
Hi, Alistair, On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 03:22:30PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote: > migrate_vma_setup() has a fast path in migrate_vma_collect_pmd() that > installs migration entries directly if it can lock the migrating page. > When removing a dirty pte the dirty bit is supposed to be carried over > to the underlying page to prevent it being lost. > > Currently migrate_vma_*() can only be used for private anonymous > mappings. That means loss of the dirty bit usually doesn't result in > data loss because these pages are typically not file-backed. However > pages may be backed by swap storage which can result in data loss if an > attempt is made to migrate a dirty page that doesn't yet have the > PageDirty flag set. > > In this case migration will fail due to unexpected references but the > dirty pte bit will be lost. If the page is subsequently reclaimed data > won't be written back to swap storage as it is considered uptodate, > resulting in data loss if the page is subsequently accessed. > > Prevent this by copying the dirty bit to the page when removing the pte > to match what try_to_migrate_one() does. > > Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> > Reported-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> This line should be: Reported-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Please also feel free to add: Acked-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> Thanks,
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> writes: > Hi, Alistair, > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 03:22:30PM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote: >> migrate_vma_setup() has a fast path in migrate_vma_collect_pmd() that >> installs migration entries directly if it can lock the migrating page. >> When removing a dirty pte the dirty bit is supposed to be carried over >> to the underlying page to prevent it being lost. >> >> Currently migrate_vma_*() can only be used for private anonymous >> mappings. That means loss of the dirty bit usually doesn't result in >> data loss because these pages are typically not file-backed. However >> pages may be backed by swap storage which can result in data loss if an >> attempt is made to migrate a dirty page that doesn't yet have the >> PageDirty flag set. >> >> In this case migration will fail due to unexpected references but the >> dirty pte bit will be lost. If the page is subsequently reclaimed data >> won't be written back to swap storage as it is considered uptodate, >> resulting in data loss if the page is subsequently accessed. >> >> Prevent this by copying the dirty bit to the page when removing the pte >> to match what try_to_migrate_one() does. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> >> Reported-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> > > This line should be: > > Reported-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> > > Please also feel free to add: > > Acked-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> Thanks Peter, my bad. I assume Andrew can fix up the tags if I don't need to re-spin this series. > Thanks,
Hi, Alistair, On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 1:23 PM Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: > > migrate_vma_setup() has a fast path in migrate_vma_collect_pmd() that > installs migration entries directly if it can lock the migrating page. > When removing a dirty pte the dirty bit is supposed to be carried over > to the underlying page to prevent it being lost. > > Currently migrate_vma_*() can only be used for private anonymous > mappings. That means loss of the dirty bit usually doesn't result in > data loss because these pages are typically not file-backed. However > pages may be backed by swap storage which can result in data loss if an > attempt is made to migrate a dirty page that doesn't yet have the > PageDirty flag set. > > In this case migration will fail due to unexpected references but the > dirty pte bit will be lost. If the page is subsequently reclaimed data > won't be written back to swap storage as it is considered uptodate, > resulting in data loss if the page is subsequently accessed. > > Prevent this by copying the dirty bit to the page when removing the pte > to match what try_to_migrate_one() does. > > Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> > Reported-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> > --- > mm/migrate_device.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/migrate_device.c b/mm/migrate_device.c > index 27fb37d..d38f8a6 100644 > --- a/mm/migrate_device.c > +++ b/mm/migrate_device.c > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > #include <linux/export.h> > #include <linux/memremap.h> > #include <linux/migrate.h> > +#include <linux/mm.h> > #include <linux/mm_inline.h> > #include <linux/mmu_notifier.h> > #include <linux/oom.h> > @@ -211,6 +212,10 @@ static int migrate_vma_collect_pmd(pmd_t *pmdp, > > migrate->cpages++; > > + /* Set the dirty flag on the folio now the pte is gone. */ > + if (pte_dirty(pte)) > + folio_mark_dirty(page_folio(page)); > + I think that this isn't sufficient to fix all issues. Firstly, "pte" is assigned at the begin of the loop, before the PTE is cleared via ptep_clear_flush() or ptep_get_and_clear(). That is, the pte isn't changed atomically. Between "pte" assignment and PTE clear, the PTE may become dirty. That is, we need to update pte when we clear the PTE. And I don't know why we use ptep_get_and_clear() to clear PTE if (!anon_exclusive). Why don't we need to flush the TLB? Best Regards, Huang, Ying > /* Setup special migration page table entry */ > if (mpfn & MIGRATE_PFN_WRITE) > entry = make_writable_migration_entry( > > base-commit: ffcf9c5700e49c0aee42dcba9a12ba21338e8136 > -- > git-series 0.9.1 >
huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com> writes: > Hi, Alistair, > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 1:23 PM Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: >> >> migrate_vma_setup() has a fast path in migrate_vma_collect_pmd() that >> installs migration entries directly if it can lock the migrating page. >> When removing a dirty pte the dirty bit is supposed to be carried over >> to the underlying page to prevent it being lost. >> >> Currently migrate_vma_*() can only be used for private anonymous >> mappings. That means loss of the dirty bit usually doesn't result in >> data loss because these pages are typically not file-backed. However >> pages may be backed by swap storage which can result in data loss if an >> attempt is made to migrate a dirty page that doesn't yet have the >> PageDirty flag set. >> >> In this case migration will fail due to unexpected references but the >> dirty pte bit will be lost. If the page is subsequently reclaimed data >> won't be written back to swap storage as it is considered uptodate, >> resulting in data loss if the page is subsequently accessed. >> >> Prevent this by copying the dirty bit to the page when removing the pte >> to match what try_to_migrate_one() does. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> >> Reported-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> >> --- >> mm/migrate_device.c | 5 +++++ >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/mm/migrate_device.c b/mm/migrate_device.c >> index 27fb37d..d38f8a6 100644 >> --- a/mm/migrate_device.c >> +++ b/mm/migrate_device.c >> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >> #include <linux/export.h> >> #include <linux/memremap.h> >> #include <linux/migrate.h> >> +#include <linux/mm.h> >> #include <linux/mm_inline.h> >> #include <linux/mmu_notifier.h> >> #include <linux/oom.h> >> @@ -211,6 +212,10 @@ static int migrate_vma_collect_pmd(pmd_t *pmdp, >> >> migrate->cpages++; >> >> + /* Set the dirty flag on the folio now the pte is gone. */ >> + if (pte_dirty(pte)) >> + folio_mark_dirty(page_folio(page)); >> + > > I think that this isn't sufficient to fix all issues. Firstly, "pte" > is assigned at the begin of the loop, before the PTE is cleared via > ptep_clear_flush() or ptep_get_and_clear(). That is, the pte isn't > changed atomically. Between "pte" assignment and PTE clear, the PTE > may become dirty. That is, we need to update pte when we clear the > PTE. Oh good catch, thanks. Will fix. > And I don't know why we use ptep_get_and_clear() to clear PTE if > (!anon_exclusive). Why don't we need to flush the TLB? We do the TLB flush at the end if anything was modified: /* Only flush the TLB if we actually modified any entries */ if (unmapped) flush_tlb_range(walk->vma, start, end); Obviously I don't think that will work correctly now given we have to read the dirty bits and clear the PTE atomically. I assume it was originally written this way for some sort of performance reason. - Alistair > Best Regards, > Huang, Ying > >> /* Setup special migration page table entry */ >> if (mpfn & MIGRATE_PFN_WRITE) >> entry = make_writable_migration_entry( >> >> base-commit: ffcf9c5700e49c0aee42dcba9a12ba21338e8136 >> -- >> git-series 0.9.1 >>
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 10:33 AM Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com> writes: > > > Hi, Alistair, > > > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 1:23 PM Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: [snip] > > > And I don't know why we use ptep_get_and_clear() to clear PTE if > > (!anon_exclusive). Why don't we need to flush the TLB? > > We do the TLB flush at the end if anything was modified: > > /* Only flush the TLB if we actually modified any entries */ > if (unmapped) > flush_tlb_range(walk->vma, start, end); > > Obviously I don't think that will work correctly now given we have to > read the dirty bits and clear the PTE atomically. I assume it was > originally written this way for some sort of performance reason. Thanks for pointing this out. If there were parallel page table operations such as mprotect() or munmap(), the delayed TLB flushing mechanism here may have some problem. Please take a look at the comments of flush_tlb_batched_pending() and TLB flush batching implementation in try_to_unmap_one(). We may need to flush TLB with page table lock held or use a mechanism similar to that in try_to_unmap_one(). Best Regards, Huang, Ying
huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 10:33 AM Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: >> >> >> huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > Hi, Alistair, >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 1:23 PM Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: > > [snip] > >> >> > And I don't know why we use ptep_get_and_clear() to clear PTE if >> > (!anon_exclusive). Why don't we need to flush the TLB? >> >> We do the TLB flush at the end if anything was modified: >> >> /* Only flush the TLB if we actually modified any entries */ >> if (unmapped) >> flush_tlb_range(walk->vma, start, end); >> >> Obviously I don't think that will work correctly now given we have to >> read the dirty bits and clear the PTE atomically. I assume it was >> originally written this way for some sort of performance reason. > > Thanks for pointing this out. If there were parallel page table > operations such as mprotect() or munmap(), the delayed TLB flushing > mechanism here may have some problem. Please take a look at the > comments of flush_tlb_batched_pending() and TLB flush batching > implementation in try_to_unmap_one(). We may need to flush TLB with > page table lock held or use a mechanism similar to that in > try_to_unmap_one(). Thanks for the pointers. I agree there is likely also a problem here with the delayed TLB flushing. v2 of this patch deals with this by always flushing the TLB using ptep_flush_clear(), similar to how try_to_migrate_one() works. It looks like it could be worth investigating using batched TLB flushing for both this and try_to_migrate(), but I will leave that for a future optimisation. > Best Regards, > Huang, Ying
diff --git a/mm/migrate_device.c b/mm/migrate_device.c index 27fb37d..d38f8a6 100644 --- a/mm/migrate_device.c +++ b/mm/migrate_device.c @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ #include <linux/export.h> #include <linux/memremap.h> #include <linux/migrate.h> +#include <linux/mm.h> #include <linux/mm_inline.h> #include <linux/mmu_notifier.h> #include <linux/oom.h> @@ -211,6 +212,10 @@ static int migrate_vma_collect_pmd(pmd_t *pmdp, migrate->cpages++; + /* Set the dirty flag on the folio now the pte is gone. */ + if (pte_dirty(pte)) + folio_mark_dirty(page_folio(page)); + /* Setup special migration page table entry */ if (mpfn & MIGRATE_PFN_WRITE) entry = make_writable_migration_entry(
migrate_vma_setup() has a fast path in migrate_vma_collect_pmd() that installs migration entries directly if it can lock the migrating page. When removing a dirty pte the dirty bit is supposed to be carried over to the underlying page to prevent it being lost. Currently migrate_vma_*() can only be used for private anonymous mappings. That means loss of the dirty bit usually doesn't result in data loss because these pages are typically not file-backed. However pages may be backed by swap storage which can result in data loss if an attempt is made to migrate a dirty page that doesn't yet have the PageDirty flag set. In this case migration will fail due to unexpected references but the dirty pte bit will be lost. If the page is subsequently reclaimed data won't be written back to swap storage as it is considered uptodate, resulting in data loss if the page is subsequently accessed. Prevent this by copying the dirty bit to the page when removing the pte to match what try_to_migrate_one() does. Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> Reported-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> --- mm/migrate_device.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) base-commit: ffcf9c5700e49c0aee42dcba9a12ba21338e8136