Re: [PATCH mm-unstable RFC 00/26] mm: support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE on all architectures with swap PTEs

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

 



On 06.12.22 15:47, David Hildenbrand wrote:
This is the follow-up on [1]:
	[PATCH v2 0/8] mm: COW fixes part 3: reliable GUP R/W FOLL_GET of
	anonymous pages

After we implemented __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE on most prominent
enterprise architectures, implement __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE on all
remaining architectures that support swap PTEs.

This makes sure that exclusive anonymous pages will stay exclusive, even
after they were swapped out -- for example, making GUP R/W FOLL_GET of
anonymous pages reliable. Details can be found in [1].

This primarily fixes remaining known O_DIRECT memory corruptions that can
happen on concurrent swapout, whereby we can lose DMA reads to a page
(modifying the user page by writing to it).

To verify, there are two test cases (requiring swap space, obviously):
(1) The O_DIRECT+swapout test case [2] from Andrea. This test case tries
     triggering a race condition.
(2) My vmsplice() test case [3] that tries to detect if the exclusive
     marker was lost during swapout, not relying on a race condition.


For example, on 32bit x86 (with and without PAE), my test case fails
without these patches:
	$ ./test_swp_exclusive
	FAIL: page was replaced during COW
But succeeds with these patches:
	$ ./test_swp_exclusive
	PASS: page was not replaced during COW


Why implement __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE for all architectures, even
the ones where swap support might be in a questionable state? This is the
first step towards removing "readable_exclusive" migration entries, and
instead using pte_swp_exclusive() also with (readable) migration entries
instead (as suggested by Peter). The only missing piece for that is
supporting pmd_swp_exclusive() on relevant architectures with THP
migration support.

As all relevant architectures now implement __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE,,
we can drop __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE in the last patch.


RFC because some of the swap PTE layouts are really tricky and I really
need some feedback related to deciphering these layouts and "using yet
unused PTE bits in swap PTEs". I tried cross-compiling all relevant setups
(phew, I might only miss some power/nohash variants), but only tested on
x86 so far.

As I was messing with sparc64 either way and got debian to boot under QEMU, I verified that the sparc64 change also seems to work as expected (under sun4u).

--
Thanks,

David / dhildenb




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux