lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/23] userfaultfd-wp: Support shmem and hugetlbfs
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 08:48:49PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> This patchset is based on tag v5.12-rc3-mmots-2021-03-17-22-26. To run the
> selftest, need to apply the two patches to fix minor mode page leak:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210322175132.36659-1-peterx@redhat.com/
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210322204836.1650221-1-axelrasmussen@google.com/
>
> Since I didn't get any NACK in the previous RFC series for months, I decided to
> remove the RFC tag starting from this version, so this is v1 of uffd-wp support
> on shmem & hugetlb.
>
> The whole series can also be found online [1].
>
> The major comment I'd like to get is on the new idea of swap special pte. That
> comes from suggestions from both Hugh and Andrea and I appreciated a lot for
> those discussions.
>
> In short, the so-called "swap special pte" in this patchset is a new type of
> pte that doesn't exist in the past, but it got used initially in this series in
> file-backed memories. It is used to persist information even if the ptes got
> dropped meanwhile when the page cache still existed. For example, when
> splitting a file-backed huge pmd, we could be simply dropping the pmd entry
> then wait until another fault coming. It's okay in the past since all
> information in the pte can be retained from the page cache when the next page
> fault triggers. However in this case, uffd-wp is per-pte information which
> cannot be kept in page cache, so that information needs to be maintained
> somehow still in the pgtable entry, even if the pgtable entry is going to be
> dropped. Here instead of replacing with a none entry, we used the "swap
> special pte". Then when the next page fault triggers, we can observe orig_pte
> to retain this information.
>
> I'm copy-pasting some commit message from the patch "mm/swap: Introduce the
> idea of special swap ptes", where it tried to explain this pte in another angle:
>
> We used to have special swap entries, like migration entries, hw-poison
> entries, device private entries, etc.
>
> Those "special swap entries" reside in the range that they need to be at least
> swap entries first, and their types are decided by swp_type(entry).
>
> This patch introduces another idea called "special swap ptes".
>
> It's very easy to get confused against "special swap entries", but a speical
> swap pte should never contain a swap entry at all. It means, it's illegal to
> call pte_to_swp_entry() upon a special swap pte.
>
> Make the uffd-wp special pte to be the first special swap pte.
>
> Before this patch, is_swap_pte()==true means one of the below:
>
> (a.1) The pte has a normal swap entry (non_swap_entry()==false). For
> example, when an anonymous page got swapped out.
>
> (a.2) The pte has a special swap entry (non_swap_entry()==true). For
> example, a migration entry, a hw-poison entry, etc.
>
> After this patch, is_swap_pte()==true means one of the below, where case (b) is
> added:
>
> (a) The pte contains a swap entry.
>
> (a.1) The pte has a normal swap entry (non_swap_entry()==false). For
> example, when an anonymous page got swapped out.
>
> (a.2) The pte has a special swap entry (non_swap_entry()==true). For
> example, a migration entry, a hw-poison entry, etc.
>
> (b) The pte does not contain a swap entry at all (so it cannot be passed
> into pte_to_swp_entry()). For example, uffd-wp special swap pte.
>
> Hugetlbfs needs similar thing because it's also file-backed. I directly reused
> the same special pte there, though the shmem/hugetlb change on supporting this
> new pte is different since they don't share code path a lot.
>
> Patch layout
> ============
>
> Part (1): Shmem support, this is where the special swap pte is introduced.
> Some zap rework is needed within the process:
>
> shmem/userfaultfd: Take care of UFFDIO_COPY_MODE_WP
> mm: Clear vmf->pte after pte_unmap_same() returns
> mm/userfaultfd: Introduce special pte for unmapped file-backed mem
> mm/swap: Introduce the idea of special swap ptes
> shmem/userfaultfd: Handle uffd-wp special pte in page fault handler
> mm: Drop first_index/last_index in zap_details
> mm: Introduce zap_details.zap_flags
> mm: Introduce ZAP_FLAG_SKIP_SWAP
> mm: Pass zap_flags into unmap_mapping_pages()
> shmem/userfaultfd: Persist uffd-wp bit across zapping for file-backed
> shmem/userfaultfd: Allow wr-protect none pte for file-backed mem
> shmem/userfaultfd: Allows file-back mem to be uffd wr-protected on thps
> shmem/userfaultfd: Handle the left-overed special swap ptes
> shmem/userfaultfd: Pass over uffd-wp special swap pte when fork()
>
> Part (2): Hugetlb support, we need to disable huge pmd sharing for uffd-wp
> because not compatible just like uffd minor mode. The rest is the changes
> required to teach hugetlbfs understand the special swap pte too that introduced
> with the uffd-wp change:
>
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Hook page faults for uffd write protection
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Take care of UFFDIO_COPY_MODE_WP
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Handle UFFDIO_WRITEPROTECT
> hugetlb: Pass vma into huge_pte_alloc()
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Forbid huge pmd sharing when uffd enabled
> mm/hugetlb: Introduce huge version of special swap pte helpers
> mm/hugetlb: Move flush_hugetlb_tlb_range() into hugetlb.h
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Unshare all pmds for hugetlbfs when register wp
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Handle uffd-wp special pte in hugetlb pf handler
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Allow wr-protect none ptes
> hugetlb/userfaultfd: Only drop uffd-wp special pte if required
>
> Part (3): Enable both features in code and test
>
> userfaultfd: Enable write protection for shmem & hugetlbfs
> userfaultfd/selftests: Enable uffd-wp for shmem/hugetlbfs
>
> Tests
> =========
>
> I've tested it using either userfaultfd kselftest program, but also with
> umapsort [2] which should be even stricter. Tested page swapping in/out during
> umapsort.
>
> If anyone would like to try umapsort, need to use an extremely hacked version
> of umap library [3], because by default umap only supports anonymous. So to
> test it we need to build [3] then [2].
>
> Any comment would be greatly welcomed. Thanks,
>
> [1] https://github.com/xzpeter/linux/tree/uffd-wp-shmem-hugetlbfs
> [2] https://github.com/LLNL/umap-apps
> [3] https://github.com/xzpeter/umap/tree/peter-shmem-hugetlbfs

Hugh, Mike, Andrew,

Any comment for this series?

Thanks,

--
Peter Xu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-21 18:04    [W:0.375 / U:4.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site