Re: [RFC 3/6] mm: mark dirty bit on swapped-in page

[Cyrill Gorcunov]

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 03:15:42PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Basically, MADV_FREE relys on the dirty bit in page table entry
> to decide whether VM allows to discard the page or not.
> IOW, if page table entry includes marked dirty bit, VM shouldn't
> discard the page.
> 
> However, if swap-in by read fault happens, page table entry
> point out the page doesn't have marked dirty bit so MADV_FREE
> might discard the page wrongly.
> 
> To fix the problem, this patch marks page table entry of page
> swapping-in as dirty so VM shouldn't discard the page suddenly
> under us.
> 
> With MADV_FREE point of view, marking dirty unconditionally is
> no problem because we dropped swapped page in MADV_FREE sycall
> context(ie, Look at madvise_free_pte_range) so every swapping-in
> pages are no MADV_FREE hinted pages.
> 
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Yalin Wang <yalin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  mm/memory.c | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> index 8a2fc9945b46..d1709f763152 100644
> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@ -2557,9 +2557,11 @@ static int do_swap_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  
>  	inc_mm_counter_fast(mm, MM_ANONPAGES);
>  	dec_mm_counter_fast(mm, MM_SWAPENTS);
> -	pte = mk_pte(page, vma->vm_page_prot);
> +
> +	/* Mark dirty bit of page table because MADV_FREE relies on it */
> +	pte = pte_mkdirty(mk_pte(page, vma->vm_page_prot));
>  	if ((flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) && reuse_swap_page(page)) {
> -		pte = maybe_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(pte), vma);
> +		pte = maybe_mkwrite(pte, vma);
>  		flags &= ~FAULT_FLAG_WRITE;
>  		ret |= VM_FAULT_WRITE;
>  		exclusive = 1;

Hi Minchan! Really sorry for delay in reply. Look, I don't understand
the moment -- if page has fault on read then before the patch the
PTE won't carry the dirty flag but now we do set it up unconditionally
and to me it looks somehow strange at least because this as well
sets soft-dirty bit on pages which were not modified but only swapped
out. Am I missing something obvious?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/