Byungchul Park <byungchul@xxxxxx> writes:
> On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 10:16:39AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 5/9/24 23:51, Byungchul Park wrote:
>> > To achieve that:
>> >
>> > 1. For the folios that map only to non-writable tlb entries, prevent
>> > tlb flush during unmapping but perform it just before the folios
>> > actually become used, out of buddy or pcp.
>>
>> Is this just _pure_ unmapping (like MADV_DONTNEED), or does it apply to
>> changing the memory map, like munmap() itself?
>
> I think it can be applied to any unmapping of ro ones but LUF for now is
> working only with unmapping during folio migrion and reclaim.
>
>> > 2. When any non-writable ptes change to writable e.g. through fault
>> > handler, give up luf mechanism and perform tlb flush required
>> > right away.
>> >
>> > 3. When a writable mapping is created e.g. through mmap(), give up
>> > luf mechanism and perform tlb flush required right away.
>>
>> Let's say you do this:
>>
>> fd = open("/some/file", O_RDONLY);
>> ptr1 = mmap(-1, size, PROT_READ, ..., fd, ...);
>> foo1 = *ptr1;
>>
>> You now have a read-only PTE pointing to the first page of /some/file.
>> Let's say try_to_unmap() comes along and decides it can_luf_folio().
>> The page gets pulled out of the page cache and freed, the PTE is zeroed.
>> But the TLB is never flushed.
>>
>> Now, someone does:
>>
>> fd2 = open("/some/other/file", O_RDONLY);
>> ptr2 = mmap(ptr1, size, PROT_READ, MAP_FIXED, fd, ...);
>> foo2 = *ptr2;
>>
>> and they overwrite the old VMA. Does foo2 have the contents of the new
>> "/some/other/file" or the old "/some/file"? How does the new mmap()
>
> Good point. It should've give up LUF at the 2nd mmap() in this case.
> I will fix it by introducing a new flag in task_struct indicating if LUF
> has left stale maps for the task so that LUF can give up and flush right
> away in mmap().
>
>> know that there was something to flush?
>>
>> BTW, the same thing could happen without a new mmap(). Someone could
>> modify the file in the middle, maybe even from another process.
>
> Thank you for the pointing out. I will fix it too by introducing a new
> flag in inode or something to make LUF aware if updating the file has
> been tried so that LUF can give up and flush right away in the case.
>
> Plus, I will add another give-up at code changing the permission of vma
> to writable.
I guess that you need a framework similar as
"flush_tlb_batched_pending()" to deal with interaction with other TLB
related operations.
--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
> Thank you very much.
>
> Byungchul
>
>> fd = open("/some/file", O_RDONLY);
>> ptr1 = mmap(-1, size, PROT_READ, ..., fd, ...);
>> foo1 = *ptr1;
>> // LUF happens here
>> // "/some/file" changes
>> foo2 = *ptr1; // Does this see the change?
