Re: [PATCH v6 15/17] dax: add struct iomap based DAX PMD support
From: Ross Zwisler
Date: Thu Oct 13 2016 - 15:25:30 EST
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:42:24PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 12-10-16 16:50:20, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > DAX PMDs have been disabled since Jan Kara introduced DAX radix tree based
> > locking. This patch allows DAX PMDs to participate in the DAX radix tree
> > based locking scheme so that they can be re-enabled using the new struct
> > iomap based fault handlers.
> > There are currently three types of DAX 4k entries: 4k zero pages, 4k DAX
> > mappings that have an associated block allocation, and 4k DAX empty
> > entries. The empty entries exist to provide locking for the duration of a
> > given page fault.
> > This patch adds three equivalent 2MiB DAX entries: Huge Zero Page (HZP)
> > entries, PMD DAX entries that have associated block allocations, and 2 MiB
> > DAX empty entries.
> > Unlike the 4k case where we insert a struct page* into the radix tree for
> > 4k zero pages, for HZP we insert a DAX exceptional entry with the new
> > RADIX_DAX_HZP flag set. This is because we use a single 2 MiB zero page in
> > every 2MiB hole mapping, and it doesn't make sense to have that same struct
> > page* with multiple entries in multiple trees. This would cause contention
> > on the single page lock for the one Huge Zero Page, and it would break the
> > page->index and page->mapping associations that are assumed to be valid in
> > many other places in the kernel.
> > One difficult use case is when one thread is trying to use 4k entries in
> > radix tree for a given offset, and another thread is using 2 MiB entries
> > for that same offset. The current code handles this by making the 2 MiB
> > user fall back to 4k entries for most cases. This was done because it is
> > the simplest solution, and because the use of 2MiB pages is already
> > opportunistic.
> > If we were to try to upgrade from 4k pages to 2MiB pages for a given range,
> > we run into the problem of how we lock out 4k page faults for the entire
> > 2MiB range while we clean out the radix tree so we can insert the 2MiB
> > entry. We can solve this problem if we need to, but I think that the cases
> > where both 2MiB entries and 4K entries are being used for the same range
> > will be rare enough and the gain small enough that it probably won't be
> > worth the complexity.
> > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Just one small bug below. Feel free to add:
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> after fixing that.
Fixed, thank you for the catch and the review!