Jason Gunthorpe jgg@nvidia.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 09:31:03AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 16.02.22 03:36, Alistair Popple wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 February 2022 1:03:57 PM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:23:44PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
Device private and device coherent pages are not marked with pte_devmap and they are backed by a struct page. The only way of inserting them is via migrate_vma. The refcount is decremented in zap_pte_range() on munmap() with special handling for device private pages. Looking at it again though I wonder if there is any special treatment required in zap_pte_range() for device coherent pages given they count as present pages.
This is what I guessed, but we shouldn't be able to just drop pte_devmap on these pages without any other work?? Granted it does very little already..
Yes, I agree we need to check this more closely. For device private pages not having pte_devmap is fine, because they are non-present swap entries so they always get special handling in the swap entry paths but the same isn't true for coherent device pages.
I'm curious, how does the refcount of a PageAnon() DEVICE_COHERENT page look like when mapped? I'd assume it's also (currently) still offset by one, meaning, if it's mapped into a single page table it's always at least 2.
Christoph fixed this offset by one and updated the DEVICE_COHERENT patchset, I hope we will see that version merged.
I thought at least gup_fast needed to be touched or did this get handled by scanning the page list after the fact?
Right, for gup I think the only special handling required is to prevent pinning. I had assumed that check_and_migrate_movable_pages() would still get called for gup_fast but unless I've missed something I don't think it does. That means gup_fast could still pin movable and coherent pages. Technically that is ok for coherent pages, but it's undesirable.
We really should have the same pinning rules for GUP vs. GUP-fast. is_pinnable_page() should be the right place for such checks (similarly as indicated in my reply to the migration series).
Yes, I think this is a bug too.
Agreed, I will add a fix for it to my series as I was surprised the rules for PUP-fast were different. I can see how this happened though - check_and_migrate_cma_pages() (the precursor to check_and_migrate_movable_pages()) was added before PUP-fast and FOLL_LONGTERM so I guess we just never added this check there.
- Alistair
The other place that needs careful audit is all the callers using vm_normal_page() - they must all be able to accept a ZONE_DEVICE page if we don't set pte_devmap.
Jason