Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/18/24 00:58, Alistair Popple wrote:
>> Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 04:49:11PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
>>>> Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 02:21:13PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
>>>>>> Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 12:49:55PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
>>>>>>>> Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 04:46:52AM +0000, Matthew Brost wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 03:04:06PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>>>>>> + unsigned long i;
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < npages; i++) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> + struct page *page = pfn_to_page(src_pfns[i]);
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + if (!get_page_unless_zero(page)) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> + src_pfns[i] = 0;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + if (!trylock_page(page)) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> + src_pfns[i] = 0;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + put_page(page);
>>>>>>>>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + src_pfns[i] = migrate_pfn(src_pfns[i]) | MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE;
>>>>>>>>>>> This needs to be converted to use a folio like
>>>>>>>>>>> migrate_device_range(). But more importantly this should be split out as
>>>>>>>>>>> a function that both migrate_device_range() and this function can call
>>>>>>>>>>> given this bit is identical.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Missed the folio conversion and agree a helper shared between this
>>>>>>>>>> function and migrate_device_range would be a good idea. Let add that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Alistair,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ok, I think now I want to go slightly different direction here to give
>>>>>>>>> GPUSVM a bit more control over several eviction scenarios.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What if I exported the helper discussed above, e.g.,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 905 unsigned long migrate_device_pfn_lock(unsigned long pfn)
>>>>>>>>> 906 {
>>>>>>>>> 907 struct folio *folio;
>>>>>>>>> 908
>>>>>>>>> 909 folio = folio_get_nontail_page(pfn_to_page(pfn));
>>>>>>>>> 910 if (!folio)
>>>>>>>>> 911 return 0;
>>>>>>>>> 912
>>>>>>>>> 913 if (!folio_trylock(folio)) {
>>>>>>>>> 914 folio_put(folio);
>>>>>>>>> 915 return 0;
>>>>>>>>> 916 }
>>>>>>>>> 917
>>>>>>>>> 918 return migrate_pfn(pfn) | MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE;
>>>>>>>>> 919 }
>>>>>>>>> 920 EXPORT_SYMBOL(migrate_device_pfn_lock);
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And then also export migrate_device_unmap.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The usage here would be let a driver collect the device pages in virtual
>>>>>>>>> address range via hmm_range_fault, lock device pages under notifier
>>>>>>>>> lock ensuring device pages are valid, drop the notifier lock and call
>>>>>>>>> migrate_device_unmap.
>>>>>>>> I'm still working through this series but that seems a bit dubious, the
>>>>>>>> locking here is pretty subtle and easy to get wrong so seeing some code
>>>>>>>> would help me a lot in understanding what you're suggesting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For sure locking in tricky, my mistake on not working through this
>>>>>>> before sending out the next rev but it came to mind after sending +
>>>>>>> regarding some late feedback from Thomas about using hmm for eviction
>>>>>>> [2]. His suggestion of using hmm_range_fault to trigger migration
>>>>>>> doesn't work for coherent pages, while something like below does.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [2] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/610957/?series=137870&rev=1#comment_1125461
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is a snippet I have locally which seems to work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2024 retry:
>>>>>>> 2025 hmm_range.notifier_seq = mmu_interval_read_begin(notifier);
>>>>>>> 2026 hmm_range.hmm_pfns = src;
>>>>>>> 2027
>>>>>>> 2028 while (true) {
>>>>>>> 2029 mmap_read_lock(mm);
>>>>>>> 2030 err = hmm_range_fault(&hmm_range);
>>>>>>> 2031 mmap_read_unlock(mm);
>>>>>>> 2032 if (err == -EBUSY) {
>>>>>>> 2033 if (time_after(jiffies, timeout))
>>>>>>> 2034 break;
>>>>>>> 2035
>>>>>>> 2036 hmm_range.notifier_seq = mmu_interval_read_begin(notifier);
>>>>>>> 2037 continue;
>>>>>>> 2038 }
>>>>>>> 2039 break;
>>>>>>> 2040 }
>>>>>>> 2041 if (err)
>>>>>>> 2042 goto err_put;
>>>>>>> 2043
>>>>>>> 2044 drm_gpusvm_notifier_lock(gpusvm);
>>>>>>> 2045 if (mmu_interval_read_retry(notifier, hmm_range.notifier_seq)) {
>>>>>>> 2046 drm_gpusvm_notifier_unlock(gpusvm);
>>>>>>> 2047 memset(src, 0, sizeof(*src) * npages);
>>>>>>> 2048 goto retry;
>>>>>>> 2049 }
>>>>>>> 2050 for (i = 0; i < npages; ++i) {
>>>>>>> 2051 struct page *page = hmm_pfn_to_page(src[i]);
>>>>>>> 2052
>>>>>>> 2053 if (page && (is_device_private_page(page) ||
>>>>>>> 2054 is_device_coherent_page(page)) && page->zone_device_data)
>>>>>>> 2055 src[i] = src[i] & ~HMM_PFN_FLAGS;
>>>>>>> 2056 else
>>>>>>> 2057 src[i] = 0;
>>>>>>> 2058 if (src[i])
>>>>>>> 2059 src[i] = migrate_device_pfn_lock(src[i]);
>>>>>>> 2060 }
>>>>>>> 2061 drm_gpusvm_notifier_unlock(gpusvm);
>>>>>> Practically for eviction isn't this much the same as calling
>>>>>> migrate_vma_setup()? And also for eviction as Sima mentioned you
>>>>>> probably shouldn't be looking at mm/vma structs.
>>>>>>
>>>>> hmm_range_fault is just collecting the pages, internally I suppose it
>>>>> does look at a VMA (struct vm_area_struct) but I think the point is
>>>>> drivers should not be looking at VMA here.
>>>> migrate_vma_setup() is designed to be called by drivers and needs a vma,
>>>> so in general I don't see a problem with drivers looking up vma's. The
>>>> problem arises specifically for eviction and whether or not that happens
>>>> in the driver or hmm_range_fault() is pretty irrelevant IMHO for the
>>>> issues there (see below).
>>>>
>>> Ok, if you think it ok for drivers to lookup the VMA then purposed
>>> exporting of migrate_device_pfn_lock & migrate_device_unmap is not
>>> needed, rather just the original function exported in the this patch.
>>>
>>> More below too.
>>>
>>>>>>> 2063 migrate_device_unmap(src, npages, NULL);
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> 2101 migrate_device_pages(src, dst, npages);
>>>>>>> 2102 migrate_device_finalize(src, dst, npages);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sima has strongly suggested avoiding a CPUVMA
>>>>>>>>> lookup during eviction cases and this would let me fixup
>>>>>>>>> drm_gpusvm_range_evict in [1] to avoid this.
>>>>>>>> That sounds reasonable but for context do you have a link to the
>>>>>>>> comments/discussion on this? I couldn't readily find it, but I may have
>>>>>>>> just missed it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See in [4], search for '2. eviction' comment from sima.
>>>>>> Thanks for pointing that out. For reference here's Sima's comment:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. eviction
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Requirements much like migrate_to_ram, because otherwise we break the
>>>>>>> migration gurantee:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Only looking at physical memory datastructures and locks, no looking at
>>>>>>> mm/vma structs or relying on those being locked. We rely entirely on
>>>>>>> reverse maps from try_to_migrate to find all the mappings on both cpu
>>>>>>> and gpu side (cpu only zone device swap or migration pte entries ofc).
>>>>>> I also very much agree with this. That's basically why I added
>>>>>> migrate_device_range(), so that we can forcibly evict pages when the
>>>>>> driver needs them freed (eg. driver unload, low memory, etc.). In
>>>>>> general it is impossible to guarantee eviction og all pages using just
>>>>>> hmm_range_fault().
>>>>>>
>>>>> In this code path we don't have device pages available, hence the
>>>>> purposed collection via hmm_range_fault.
>>>> Why don't you have the pfns requiring eviction available? I need to read
>>>> this series in more depth, but generally hmm_range_fault() can't
>>>> gurantee you will find every device page.
>>>>
>>> There are two cases for eviction in my series:
>>>
>>> 1. TTM decides it needs to move memory. This calls
>>> drm_gpusvm_evict_to_ram. In this case the device pfns are available
>>> directly from drm_gpusvm_devmem so the migrate_device_* calls be used
>>> here albiet with the new function added in this patch as device pfns may
>>> be non-contiguous.
>> That makes sense and is generally what I think of when I'm thinking of
>> eviction. The new function makes sense too - migrate_device_range() was
>> primarily introduced to allow a driver to evict all device-private pages
>> from a GPU so didn't consider non-contiguous cases, etc.
>>
>>> 2. An inconsistent state for VA range occurs (mixed system and device pages,
>>> partial unmap of a range, etc...). Here we want to evict the range ram
>>> to make the state consistent. No device pages are available due to an
>>> intentional disconnect between a virtual range and physical
>>> drm_gpusvm_devmem, thus the device pages have to be looked up. This the
>>> function drm_gpusvm_range_evict. Based on what you tell me, it likely is
>>> fine the way originally coded in v2 (vma lookup + migrate_vma_*) vs
>>> using hmm_range_fault like I have suggested here.
>> Thanks for the explanation. I think vma lookup + migrate_vma_setup() is
>> fine for this usage and is exactly what you want - it was designed to
>> either select all the system memory pages or device-private pages within
>> a VA range and migrate them.
>>
>> FWIW I have toyed with the idea of a combined
>> hmm_range_fault()/migrate_vma_setup() front-end to the rest of the
>> migrate_vma_*() process but haven't come up with something nice as
>> yet. I don't think mixing the two in an open-coded fashion is a good
>> idea though, I'd rather we come up with a new API that addresses the
>> short-comings of migrate_vma_setup().
>
> This is what I have been implementing and have a WIP version now, will
> cleanup, test and send soon.
>
> It does the migration entry installing while faulting pages, and you
> continue migrate with normal migrate_vma_() flow.
Oh nice! Thanks for looking further into that idea, I'm looking forward
to seeing the results. For background Mika and I had an offline
discussion about this a little while back but I wasn't sure if it had
gone anywhere.
>>> Note #2 may be removed or unnecessary at some point if we decide to add
>>> support for ininconsistent state in GPU SVM and Xe. Keeping it simple for
>>> now though. See 'Ranges with mixed system and device pages' in [5].
>>>
>>> [5] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/619819/?series=137870&rev=2
>>>
>>>>>>> [3] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/610957/?series=137870&rev=1#comment_1110726
>>>>>>> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/BYAPR11MB3159A304925168D8B6B4671292692@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#m89cd6a37778ba5271d5381ebeb03e1f963856a78
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It would also make the function exported in this patch unnecessary too
>>>>>>>>> as non-contiguous pfns can be setup on driver side via
>>>>>>>>> migrate_device_pfn_lock and then migrate_device_unmap can be called.
>>>>>>>>> This also another eviction usage in GPUSVM, see drm_gpusvm_evict_to_ram
>>>>>>>>> in [1].
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you see an issue exporting migrate_device_pfn_lock,
>>>>>>>>> migrate_device_unmap?
>>>>>>>> If there is a good justification for it I can't see a problem with
>>>>>>>> exporting it. That said I don't really understand why you would
>>>>>>>> want/need to split those steps up but I'll wait to see the code.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is so the device pages returned from hmm_range_fault, which are only
>>>>>>> guaranteed to be valid under the notifier lock + a seqno check, to be
>>>>>>> locked and ref taken for migration. migrate_device_unmap() can trigger a
>>>>>>> MMU invalidation which takes the notifier lock thus calling the function
>>>>>>> which combines migrate_device_pfn_lock + migrate_device_unmap deadlocks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think this flow makes sense and agree in general this likely better
>>>>>>> than looking at a CPUVMA.
>>>>>> I'm still a bit confused about what is better with this flow if you are
>>>>>> still calling hmm_range_fault(). How is it better than just calling
>>>>>> migrate_vma_setup()? Obviously it will fault the pages in, but it seems
>>>>> The code in rev2 calls migrate_vma_setup but the requires a struct
>>>>> vm_area_struct argument whereas hmm_range_fault does not.
>>>> I'm not sure that's a good enough justfication because the problem isn't
>>>> whether you're looking up vma's in driver code or mm code. The problem
>>>> is you are looking up vma's at all and all that goes with that (mainly
>>>> taking mmap lock, etc.)
>>>>
>>>> And for eviction hmm_range_fault() won't even find all the pages because
>>>> their virtual address may have changed - consider what happens in cases
>>>> of mremap(), fork(), etc. So eviction really needs physical pages
>>>> (pfn's), not virtual addresses.
>>>>
>>> See above, #1 yes we use a physical pages. For #2 it is about making the
>>> state consistent within a virtual address range.
>> Yep, makes sense now. For migration of physical pages you want
>> migrate_device_*, virtual address ranges want migrate_vma_*
>>
>> - Alistair
>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>>>> we're talking about eviction here so I don't understand why that would
>>>>>> be relevant. And hmm_range_fault() still requires the VMA, although I
>>>>>> need to look at the patches more closely, probably CPUVMA is a DRM
>>>>> 'hmm_range_fault() still requires the VMA' internal yes, but again not
>>>>> as argument. This is about avoiding a driver side lookup of the VMA.
>>>>>
>>>>> CPUVMA == struct vm_area_struct in this email.
>>>> Thanks for the clarification.
>>>>
>>>> - Alistair
>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>>> specific concept?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Alistair
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Alistair
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/619809/?series=137870&rev=2
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + migrate_device_unmap(src_pfns, npages, NULL);
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(migrate_device_prepopulated_range);
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> /*
>>>>>>>>>>>> * Migrate a device coherent folio back to normal memory. The caller should have
>>>>>>>>>>>> * a reference on folio which will be copied to the new folio if migration is
>
> --Mika
