From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=91.218.175.148 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793932416; b=B2GIWY+cQy7GQyoKCXpSHBHMwl64SvHvvWmq8LdTc5jq01eBz/yYwbC+/q3i1Fqp4EqY f3YmVgpOo5arhsjFOLOLdSFs1amhd4DdorkbMv8kI20s8s4M1a+bDxSSlyhDzKnXAm0uF UMGXx/jkm8eEcGUrq5swcUMvCFdu2/ybYMkucQo0itkaCYknbKl0yFTt02024G1zoe8Ei L/AisOvS3Uiz4DQbT/tbKFOKqmi/svhJF9wAPn74bU55E+KAGARBfUIhrMCh9oWanme2P UTX+CN0LC0tIATweMIE1fHdKQLR+8cdgZd57u6UKM2yP13T2S8Rl35f6zn6F3FWU1qw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793932416; h=DMARC-Filter:X-Envelope-To:DKIM-Signature:X-Envelope-To:Received: X-Mizu-Trace-ID:X-Migadu-Flow:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID: X-Mailer:In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=SXoEZIq19ZsudykahfhHlUjp3Tw92I3IYYm3tv8K4kc=; b=gRKndp2PQMzLn9TttLzdQBq4ryoK+BQowlfoXqi3yGq3LJ3g/eArhvYGnvmDa/uYi1WS 9bJvWVESHuDewTYvVlWTdD8P3l8UIdpH1+iOXZOidGHPf8DiGlqkCcTVIWRez+f88XqLd J8D6OcQ6cdJSQMGm+wmY792JwzOU6d6nDpwWhjaDAtXS08e/hN03Wf8mdIYHK3F+LYY9O 6svATM9jjBKHJ43R0+6NghXYAR/NHjgm7d3mSdRRidpSrPOgw0QSVDVO/0KYChnalCxkc 5CLtUDI/M4hiGX5/BVnpKwkKu4NQllCIiYDAwMwPUQq8g8GTx8Qmnk2mn6WRykrP2GQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=PWPIDWjJ; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=91.218.175.148 Received: from mta0.migadu.com (out-148.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.148]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F539606A31B for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2026 02:33:34 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 6F539606A31B Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=PWPIDWjJ X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=MBSsQLLplL/UU5QOXZ54mCnI8R9Q6VI+6tV+Y55tm1g=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1793932412; v=1; x=1794537212; b=PWPIDWjJxWGw2L3YTyhc/Z2Ua9WWc0b0D90Rxyn63I/0PTrfPFwY4/n2fRPufO3oksjMd1Q8 o9ymJaEgRpbGfIdDHParXAVnj0xt4BWd5TFPVwrpRO9ZE7Ze1fsiSIaeWXtLeZEZyDxR77qv2er Ir4qrEzXlO1k6m2p+UVqyj7M= X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id ebccd1c96b4da325; Fri, 06 Nov 2026 02:33:31 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: ebccd1c96b4da325 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT From: Lance Yang To: baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, david@kernel.org Cc: lance.yang@linux.dev, baohua@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ljs@kernel.org, riel@surriel.com, liam@infradead.org, vbabka@kernel.org, harry@kernel.org, jannh@google.com, qi.zheng@linux.dev, pfalcato@suse.de, ayushr@modal.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: synchronize with PTE table reclaim for all folio sizes Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2026 10:33:26 +0800 Message-ID: <20261106023326.10838-1-lance.yang@linux.dev> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.49.0 In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Fri, Nov 06, 2026 at 09:57:47AM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote: > > >On 11/5/26 9:22 PM, Lance Yang wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 11:06:29AM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: >>> On 11/5/26 10:00, Baolin Wang wrote: >>>> CC Barry, who added the TTU_SYNC in shrink_folio_list(). >>>> >>>> On 11/5/26 1:48 PM, Lance Yang wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2026/11/5 12:54, Lance Yang wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Good catch! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Right. Whether the folio can be PMD-mapped doesn't tell us whether its >>>>>> PTE table can be reclaimed, so those extra checks can skip synchronization >>>>>> that the caller explicitly asked for ;) >>>>> >>>>> Ouch ... one thing I missed ... what about order-0 reclaim? >>>>> >>>>> shrink_folio_list() only sets TTU_SYNC for large folio, so can't we still >>>>> hit the same race there? >>>> >>>> Thanks Lance. But this matches the purpose of the TTU_SYNC flag, which is used >>>> to avoid racy checks with PVMW_SYNC. If no TTU_SYNC flag is set, it means the >>>> caller can tolerate some racy checks. >>>> >>>> For this case, I think we should set TTU_SYNC unconditionally in >>>> shrink_folio_list(). Barry, what do you think? >>> >>> That makes sense. I hope this doesn't throw a big wrench into our reclaim >>> performance numbers. >>> >>> Can someone benchmark this? >>> >>> But maybe we should really follow-up with the folio-size based optimization in >>> sync_with_folio_pmd_zap(), where we only need a memory barrier (and sufficient >>> documentation why something that cannot be PMD-mapped can get away cheaper). >> >> Dug into the history a bit :D >> >> TTU_SYNC goes back to Hugh's THP splitting fix [1]. A racing zap could >> clear the PTE/PMD before updating mapcount, so the walker could skip the >> lock and return before the accounting caught up. >> >> Barry later enabled it for large-folio reclaim [2], to avoid skipping >> temporarily cleared PTEs and ending up with a partially unmapped folio. >> He mentioned that small folios had the same race, but with just one PTE, >> they couldn't be partially unmapped. That's where the large-folio check >> in shrink_folio_list() came from. >> >> Then PTE table reclaim [3] added another way to end up with an empty PMD, >> even for a folio that can't be PMD-mapped. The truncation fix [4] moved >> the rmap flush before the PMD clear and extended synchronization in >> zap_pmd_range() to cover those folios too. >> >> Looking back at the truncation discussion [5], you also pointed out that >> page_vma_mapped_walk() needed checking, and suggested a possible >> folio-size based optimization in the helper. > >Thanks. Cheers! >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/c1e95853-8bcd-d8fd-55fa-e7f2488e78f@google.com/ >> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240306095219.71086-1-21cnbao@gmail.com/ >> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/92aba2b319a734913f18ba41e7d86a265f0b84e2.1733305182.git.zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com/ >> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/14ebbd556cc4941f0ebc43da59fa6a2fdca25dc8.1793148609.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com/ >> [5] https://lore.kernel.org/all/08a0907f-8e3a-4071-a2e4-fd1411c446f3@kernel.org/ >> >> So, how about starting with order-0 folios? >> >> ---8<--- >> diff --git a/include/linux/rmap.h b/include/linux/rmap.h >> index 74cca0e3c726..d01fe8282417 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/rmap.h >> +++ b/include/linux/rmap.h >> @@ -872,6 +872,8 @@ struct page_vma_mapped_walk { >> spinlock_t *ptl; >> unsigned int flags; >> bool pgoff_is_anon : 1; >> + /* Set from the folio, not the number of pages being walked. */ >> + bool folio_is_order0 : 1; >> }; >> >> #define DEFINE_FOLIO_VMA_WALK(name, _folio, _vma, _address, _flags) \ >> @@ -883,6 +885,7 @@ struct page_vma_mapped_walk { >> .address = _address, \ >> .flags = _flags, \ >> .pgoff_is_anon = folio_test_anon(_folio), \ >> + .folio_is_order0 = !folio_test_large(_folio), \ >> } >> >> static inline void page_vma_mapped_walk_done(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw) >> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h >> index 9b8864a8540a..e70869b38292 100644 >> --- a/mm/internal.h >> +++ b/mm/internal.h >> @@ -592,21 +592,29 @@ void pmd_install(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd, pgtable_t *pte); >> * sync_with_folio_pmd_zap - sync with concurrent zapping of folios >> * @mm: The mm_struct. >> * @pmdp: Pointer to the pmd that was found to be pmd_none(). >> + * @order0: True if the target is known to be an order-0 folio. >> * >> - * When we find a pmd_none() while unmapping a folio without holding the PTL, >> - * zap_huge_pmd() may have cleared the PMD but not yet updated the folio >> - * mapcount, and zap_empty_pte_table() clears the PMD only after the rmaps >> - * for the table have been removed, but nothing orders the pmd_none() read >> - * against later mapcount reads. Skipping the PMD without synchronization >> - * could make folio unmapping code assume that unmapping failed. >> + * An empty PMD does not guarantee that a later mapcount read sees the >> + * completed rmap updates. For PMD-mapped folios, zap_huge_pmd() clears >> + * the PMD before updating mapcount, so we must wait for the PMD lock. >> * >> - * Wait for concurrent zapping to complete by grabbing the PTL. >> + * Order-0 folios cannot be PMD-mapped. Their fully ordered >> + * atomic_add_negative() updates mapcount before PTE table reclaim clears >> + * the PMD. The PTE lock preserves this ordering if another CPU reclaims >> + * the table. A read barrier therefore suffices for order-0 folios. >> + * Keep taking the PMD lock for all other folios. >> */ >> -static inline void sync_with_folio_pmd_zap(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmdp) >> +static inline void sync_with_folio_pmd_zap(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmdp, >> + bool order0) >> { >> - spinlock_t *ptl = pmd_lock(mm, pmdp); >> + if (order0) { >> + /* Order the PMD read before subsequent mapcount reads. */ >> + smp_rmb(); >> + } else { >> + spinlock_t *ptl = pmd_lock(mm, pmdp); >> >> - spin_unlock(ptl); >> + spin_unlock(ptl); >> + } >> } >> >> struct zap_details; >> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c >> index 44376321180b..8955d1cd31b0 100644 >> --- a/mm/memory.c >> +++ b/mm/memory.c >> @@ -2112,7 +2112,8 @@ static inline unsigned long zap_pmd_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb, >> /* fall through */ >> } else if (pmd_none(*pmd)) { >> if (details && details->single_folio) >> - sync_with_folio_pmd_zap(tlb->mm, pmd); >> + sync_with_folio_pmd_zap(tlb->mm, pmd, >> + !folio_test_large(details->single_folio)); >> addr = next; >> continue; >> } >> diff --git a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c >> index e6b6170c2f4f..36881f8fd45e 100644 >> --- a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c >> +++ b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c >> @@ -293,11 +293,9 @@ bool page_vma_mapped_walk(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw) >> spin_unlock(pvmw->ptl); >> pvmw->ptl = NULL; >> } else if (!pmd_present(pmde)) { >> - if ((pvmw->flags & PVMW_SYNC) && >> - thp_vma_suitable_order(vma, pvmw->address, >> - PMD_ORDER) && >> - (pvmw->nr_pages >= HPAGE_PMD_NR)) >> - sync_with_folio_pmd_zap(mm, pvmw->pmd); >> + if (pvmw->flags & PVMW_SYNC) >> + sync_with_folio_pmd_zap(mm, pvmw->pmd, >> + pvmw->folio_is_order0); >> >> goto next_pmd; >> } >> @@ -379,6 +377,7 @@ unsigned long page_mapped_in_vma(const struct page *page, >> .nr_pages = 1, >> .vma = vma, >> .flags = PVMW_SYNC, >> + .folio_is_order0 = !folio_test_large(folio), >> }; >> >> if (folio_test_anon(folio)) >> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c >> index 7db6be53f3a9..79cfa9bc475b 100644 >> --- a/mm/vmscan.c >> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c >> @@ -1434,26 +1434,17 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct list_head *folio_list, >> * processes. Try to unmap it here. >> */ >> if (folio_mapped(folio)) { >> - enum ttu_flags flags = TTU_BATCH_FLUSH; >> + enum ttu_flags flags = TTU_BATCH_FLUSH | TTU_SYNC; >> bool was_swapbacked = folio_test_swapbacked(folio); >> >> if (folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio)) >> flags |= TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD; >> + >> /* >> - * Without TTU_SYNC, try_to_unmap will only begin to >> - * hold PTL from the first present PTE within a large >> - * folio. Some initial PTEs might be skipped due to >> - * races with parallel PTE writes in which PTEs can be >> - * cleared temporarily before being written new present >> - * values. This will lead to a large folio is still >> - * mapped while some subpages have been partially >> - * unmapped after try_to_unmap; TTU_SYNC helps >> - * try_to_unmap acquire PTL from the first PTE, >> - * eliminating the influence of temporary PTE values. >> + * Synchronize with concurrent rmap updates before checking >> + * folio_mapped(). Also avoid skipping temporarily cleared >> + * PTEs, which could leave a large folio partially mapped. >> */ >> - if (folio_test_large(folio)) >> - flags |= TTU_SYNC; >> - >> try_to_unmap(folio, flags); >> if (folio_mapped(folio)) { >> stat->nr_unmap_fail += nr_pages; >> -- >> >> atomic_add_negative() provides full ordering for mapcount updates. With >> 243cf1f67b36, rmap removal completes before clearing PMD, including when >> another CPU reclaims an empty table under PTE lock. So smp_rmb() is enough >> here, without an extra writer-side barrier. > >I'm afraid the memory barrier here is subtle. __folio_remove_rmap() is >complex, and in the CONFIG_NO_PAGE_MAPCOUNT branch, >folio_sub_return_large_mapcount() doesn't provide full ordering, so we >may still need smp_wmb(). Yeah, agreed for large folios. In the diff above, only order-0 folios use smp_rmb(). Note that order-0 folios take the fully ordered atomic_add_negative() branch and skip the CONFIG_NO_PAGE_MAPCOUNT branch entirely. static __always_inline void __folio_remove_rmap(struct folio *folio, struct page *page, int nr_pages, struct vm_area_struct *vma, enum pgtable_level level) { ... switch (level) { case PGTABLE_LEVEL_PTE: if (!folio_test_large(folio)) { nr = atomic_add_negative(-1, &folio->_mapcount); break; } if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NO_PAGE_MAPCOUNT)) { nr = folio_sub_return_large_mapcount(folio, nr_pages, vma); ... } ... } ... } And large folios still take the PMD lock :D >Anyway, as David said, let's fix this race first. Memory barrier >optimization requires careful analysis and clear documentation. > Yep, fine by me :D The fix goes first, of course. Thanks! Cheers, Lance