On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 03:58:31PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:51:12AM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 04:16:59PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Wed 28-06-17 16:01:48, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > > To be able to use the common 4k zero page in DAX we need to have our PTE
> > > > fault path look more like our PMD fault path where a PTE entry can be
> > > > marked as dirty and writeable as it is first inserted, rather than waiting
> > > > for a follow-up dax_pfn_mkwrite() => finish_mkwrite_fault() call.
> > > >
> > > > Right now we can rely on having a dax_pfn_mkwrite() call because we can
> > > > distinguish between these two cases in do_wp_page():
> > > >
> > > > case 1: 4k zero page => writable DAX storage
> > > > case 2: read-only DAX storage => writeable DAX storage
> > > >
> > > > This distinction is made by via vm_normal_page(). vm_normal_page() returns
> > > > false for the common 4k zero page, though, just as it does for DAX ptes.
> > > > Instead of special casing the DAX + 4k zero page case, we will simplify our
> > > > DAX PTE page fault sequence so that it matches our DAX PMD sequence, and
> > > > get rid of dax_pfn_mkwrite() completely.
> > > >
> > > > This means that insert_pfn() needs to follow the lead of insert_pfn_pmd()
> > > > and allow us to pass in a 'mkwrite' flag. If 'mkwrite' is set insert_pfn()
> > > > will do the work that was previously done by wp_page_reuse() as part of the
> > > > dax_pfn_mkwrite() call path.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Just one small comment below.
> > >
> > > > @@ -1658,14 +1658,26 @@ static int insert_pfn(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> > > > if (!pte)
> > > > goto out;
> > > > retval = -EBUSY;
> > > > - if (!pte_none(*pte))
> > > > - goto out_unlock;
> > > > + if (!pte_none(*pte)) {
> > > > + if (mkwrite) {
> > > > + entry = *pte;
> > > > + goto out_mkwrite;
> > >
> > > Can we maybe check here that (pte_pfn(*pte) == pfn_t_to_pfn(pfn)) and
> > > return -EBUSY otherwise? That way we are sure insert_pfn() isn't doing
> > > anything we don't expect
> >
> > Sure, that's fine. I'll add it as a WARN_ON_ONCE() so it's a very loud
> > failure. If the pfns don't match I think we're insane (and would have been
> > insane prior to this patch series as well) because we are getting a page fault
> > and somehow have a different PFN already mapped at that location.
>
> Umm...well, I added the warning, and during my regression testing hit a case
> where the PFNs didn't match. (generic/437 with both ext4 & XFS)
>
> I've verified that this behavior happens with vanilla v4.12, so it's not a new
> condition introduced by my patch.
>
> I'm off tracking that down - there's a bug lurking somewhere, I think.
Actually, I think we're fine. What was happening was that two faults were
racing for a private mapping. One was installing a RW PTE for the COW page
cache page via wp_page_copy(), and the second was trying to install a
read-only PTE in insert_pfn(). The PFNs don't match because the two faults
are trying to map very different PTEs - one for DAX storage, one for a page
cache page.
This collision is handled by insert_pfn() by just returning -EBUSY, which will
bail out of the fault and either re-fault if necessary, or use the PTE that
the other thread installed. For the case I described above I think both
faults will just happily use the page cache page, and the RO DAX fault won't
be retried.
I think this is fine, and I'll preserve this behavior as you suggest in the
mkwrite case by validating that the PTE is what we think it should be after we
grab the PTL.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
