Re: [RFC PATCH v2 20/20] x86/mm, mm/vmalloc: Defer flush_tlb_kernel_range() targeting NOHZ_FULL CPUs

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

 



Sorry, I missed out Dave's email, so now I'm taking my time to page (hah!)
all of this.

On 25/07/23 15:21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 10:40:04AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
>> TLB flushes for freed page tables are another game entirely.  The CPU is
>> free to cache any part of the paging hierarchy it wants at any time.
>> It's also free to set accessed and dirty bits at any time, even for
>> instructions that may never execute architecturally.
>>
>> That basically means that if you have *ANY* freed page table page
>> *ANYWHERE* in the page table hierarchy of any CPU at any time ... you're
>> screwed.
>>
>> There's no reasoning about accesses or ordering.  As soon as the CPU
>> does *anything*, it's out to get you.
>>

OK, I feel like I need to go back do some more reading now, but I think I
get the difference. Thanks for spelling it out.

>> You're going to need to do something a lot more radical to deal with
>> free page table pages.
>
> Ha! IIRC the only thing we can reasonably do there is to have strict
> per-cpu page-tables such that NOHZ_FULL CPUs can be isolated. That is,
> as long we the per-cpu tables do not contain -- and have never contained
> -- a particular table page, we can avoid flushing it. Because if it
> never was there, it also couldn't have speculatively loaded it.
>
> Now, x86 doesn't really do per-cpu page tables easily (otherwise we'd
> have done them ages ago) and doing them is going to be *major* surgery
> and pain.
>
> Other than that, we must take the TLBI-IPI when freeing
> page-table-pages.
>
>
> But yeah, I think Nadav is right, vmalloc.c never frees page-tables (or
> at least, I couldn't find it in a hurry either), but if we're going to
> be doing this, then that file must include a very prominent comment
> explaining it must never actually do so either.
>

I also couldn't find any freeing of the page-table-pages, I'll do another
pass and sharpen my quill for a big fat comment.

> Not being able to free page-tables might be a 'problem' if we're going
> to be doing more of HUGE_VMALLOC, because that means it becomes rather
> hard to swizzle from small to large pages.




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux