Re: [PATCH mm-unstable RFC 00/26] mm: support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE on all architectures with swap PTEs
From: David Hildenbrand <hidden>
Date: 2022-12-14 11:23:45
Also in:
linux-alpha, linux-m68k, linux-mips, linux-mm, linux-riscv, linux-s390, linux-sh, linux-um, lkml, loongarch, sparclinux
On 06.12.22 15:47, David Hildenbrand wrote:
This is the follow-up on [1]:
[PATCH v2 0/8] mm: COW fixes part 3: reliable GUP R/W FOLL_GET of
anonymous pages
After we implemented __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE on most prominent
enterprise architectures, implement __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE on all
remaining architectures that support swap PTEs.
This makes sure that exclusive anonymous pages will stay exclusive, even
after they were swapped out -- for example, making GUP R/W FOLL_GET of
anonymous pages reliable. Details can be found in [1].
This primarily fixes remaining known O_DIRECT memory corruptions that can
happen on concurrent swapout, whereby we can lose DMA reads to a page
(modifying the user page by writing to it).
To verify, there are two test cases (requiring swap space, obviously):
(1) The O_DIRECT+swapout test case [2] from Andrea. This test case tries
triggering a race condition.
(2) My vmsplice() test case [3] that tries to detect if the exclusive
marker was lost during swapout, not relying on a race condition.
For example, on 32bit x86 (with and without PAE), my test case fails
without these patches:
$ ./test_swp_exclusive
FAIL: page was replaced during COW
But succeeds with these patches:
$ ./test_swp_exclusive
PASS: page was not replaced during COW
Why implement __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE for all architectures, even
the ones where swap support might be in a questionable state? This is the
first step towards removing "readable_exclusive" migration entries, and
instead using pte_swp_exclusive() also with (readable) migration entries
instead (as suggested by Peter). The only missing piece for that is
supporting pmd_swp_exclusive() on relevant architectures with THP
migration support.
As all relevant architectures now implement __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE,,
we can drop __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE in the last patch.
RFC because some of the swap PTE layouts are really tricky and I really
need some feedback related to deciphering these layouts and "using yet
unused PTE bits in swap PTEs". I tried cross-compiling all relevant setups
(phew, I might only miss some power/nohash variants), but only tested on
x86 so far.As I was messing with sparc64 either way and got debian to boot under QEMU, I verified that the sparc64 change also seems to work as expected (under sun4u). -- Thanks, David / dhildenb