Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 3/3/21 10:16 PM, Alistair Popple wrote:
Some devices require exclusive write access to shared virtual
memory (SVM) ranges to perform atomic operations on that memory. This
requires CPU page tables to be updated to deny access whilst atomic
operations are occurring.

In order to do this introduce a new swap entry
type (SWP_DEVICE_EXCLUSIVE). When a SVM range needs to be marked for
exclusive access by a device all page table mappings for the particular
range are replaced with device exclusive swap entries. This causes any
CPU access to the page to result in a fault.

Faults are resovled by replacing the faulting entry with the original
mapping. This results in MMU notifiers being called which a driver uses
to update access permissions such as revoking atomic access. After
notifiers have been called the device will no longer have exclusive
access to the region.

Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@xxxxxxxxxx>

I see in the next two patches how make_device_exclusive_entry() and
check_device_exclusive_range() are used. This points out a similar
problem that migrate_vma_setup() had before I added the
mmu_notifier_range_init_migrate() helper to pass a cookie from
migrate_vma_setup() to the invalidation callback so the device driver
could ignore an invalidation callback triggered by the caller and thus
resulting in a deadlock or having to invalidate device PTEs that
wouldn't be migrating.

I think you can eliminate the need for check_device_exclusive_range() in
the same way by adding a "void *" pointer to make_device_exclusive_entry()
and passing that through to try_to_protect(), setting rmap_walk_control rwc.arg
and then passing arg to mmu_notifier_range_init_migrate().
Although, maybe it would be better to define a new
mmu_notifier_range_init_exclusive() and event type MMU_NOTIFY_EXCLUSIVE so
that a device driver can revoke atomic/exclusive access but keep read/write
access to other parts of the page.

I thought about how make_device_exclusive_entry() is similar to hmm_range_fault()
and whether it would be possible to add a new HMM_PFN_REQ_EXCLUSIVE flag but I
see that make_device_exclusive_entry() returns the pages locked and with an
additional get_page() reference. This doesn't fit well with the other
hmm_range_fault() entries being returned as a "snapshot" so having a different
API makes sense. I think it would be useful to add a HMM_PFN_EXCLUSIVE flag so
that snapshots of the page tables can at least report that a page is exclusively
being accessed by *some* device. Unfortunately, there is no pgmap pointer to be
able to tell which device has exclusive access (since any struct page could be
exclusively accessed, not just device private ones).



[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Video]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Big List of Linux Books]

  Powered by Linux