On 8/8/19 12:20 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 8/8/19 4:09 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 8/8/19 8:21 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard wrote:
>>>> On 8/7/19 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>> On Mon 05-08-19 15:20:17, john.hubbard@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>>> From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Actually, I think follow_page_mask() gets all the pages, right? And the
>>>> get_page() in __munlock_pagevec_fill() is there to allow a pagevec_release()
>>>> later.
>>>
>>> Maybe I am misreading the code (looking at Linus tree) but munlock_vma_pages_range
>>> calls follow_page for the start address and then if not THP tries to
>>> fill up the pagevec with few more pages (up to end), do the shortcut
>>> via manual pte walk as an optimization and use generic get_page there.
>>
>
> Yes, I see it finally, thanks. :)
>
>> That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
>> put_user_page() machinery is intended to be used anyway? These are
>> short-term pins for struct page manipulation, not e.g. dirtying of page
>> contents. Reading commit fc1d8e7cca2d I don't think this case falls
>> within the reasoning there. Perhaps not all GUP users should be
>> converted to the planned separate GUP tracking, and instead we should
>> have a GUP/follow_page_mask() variant that keeps using get_page/put_page?
>>
>
> Interesting. So far, the approach has been to get all the gup callers to
> release via put_user_page(), but if we add in Jan's and Ira's vaddr_pin_pages()
> wrapper, then maybe we could leave some sites unconverted.
>
> However, in order to do so, we would have to change things so that we have
> one set of APIs (gup) that do *not* increment a pin count, and another set
> (vaddr_pin_pages) that do.
>
> Is that where we want to go...?
>
Oh, and meanwhile, I'm leaning toward a cheap fix: just use gup_fast() instead
of get_page(), and also fix the releasing code. So this incremental patch, on
top of the existing one, should do it:
diff --git a/mm/mlock.c b/mm/mlock.c
index b980e6270e8a..2ea272c6fee3 100644
--- a/mm/mlock.c
+++ b/mm/mlock.c
@@ -318,18 +318,14 @@ static void __munlock_pagevec(struct pagevec *pvec, struct zone *zone)
/*
* We won't be munlocking this page in the next phase
* but we still need to release the follow_page_mask()
- * pin. We cannot do it under lru_lock however. If it's
- * the last pin, __page_cache_release() would deadlock.
+ * pin.
*/
- pagevec_add(&pvec_putback, pvec->pages[i]);
+ put_user_page(pages[i]);
pvec->pages[i] = NULL;
}
__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_MLOCK, delta_munlocked);
spin_unlock_irq(&zone->zone_pgdat->lru_lock);
- /* Now we can release pins of pages that we are not munlocking */
- pagevec_release(&pvec_putback);
-
/* Phase 2: page munlock */
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
struct page *page = pvec->pages[i];
@@ -394,6 +390,8 @@ static unsigned long __munlock_pagevec_fill(struct pagevec *pvec,
start += PAGE_SIZE;
while (start < end) {
struct page *page = NULL;
+ int ret;
+
pte++;
if (pte_present(*pte))
page = vm_normal_page(vma, start, *pte);
@@ -411,7 +409,13 @@ static unsigned long __munlock_pagevec_fill(struct pagevec *pvec,
if (PageTransCompound(page))
break;
- get_page(page);
+ /*
+ * Use get_user_pages_fast(), instead of get_page() so that the
+ * releasing code can unconditionally call put_user_page().
+ */
+ ret = get_user_pages_fast(start, 1, 0, &page);
+ if (ret != 1)
+ break;
/*
* Increase the address that will be returned *before* the
* eventual break due to pvec becoming full by adding the page
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
