Re: [RESEND PATCH] fs/aio: Replace kmap{,_atomic}() with kmap_local_page()

[Fabio M. De Francesco]

On domenica 16 ottobre 2022 17:06:56 CET Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> The use of kmap() and kmap_atomic() are being deprecated in favor of
> kmap_local_page().
> 
> There are two main problems with kmap(): (1) It comes with an overhead as
> the mapping space is restricted and protected by a global lock for
> synchronization and (2) it also requires global TLB invalidation when the
> kmap’s pool wraps and it might block when the mapping space is fully
> utilized until a slot becomes available.
> 
> With kmap_local_page() the mappings are per thread, CPU local, can take
> page faults, and can be called from any context (including interrupts).
> It is faster than kmap() in kernels with HIGHMEM enabled. Furthermore,
> the tasks can be preempted and, when they are scheduled to run again, the
> kernel virtual addresses are restored and still valid.
> 
> Since its use in fs/aio.c is safe everywhere, it should be preferred.
> 
> Therefore, replace kmap() and kmap_atomic() with kmap_local_page() in
> fs/aio.c.
> 
> Tested with xfstests on a QEMU/KVM x86_32 VM, 6GB RAM, booting a kernel
> with HIGHMEM64GB enabled.
> 
> Cc: "Venkataramanan, Anirudh" <anirudh.venkataramanan@xxxxxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
> I've tested with "./check -g aio". The tests in this group fail 3/26
> times, with and without my patch. Therefore, these changes don't introduce
> further errors. I'm not aware of any further tests I may run, so that
> any suggestions would be precious and much appreciated :-)
> 
> I'm resending this patch because some recipients were missing in the
> previous submissions. In the meantime I'm also adding some more information
> in the commit message. There are no changes in the code.
> 
>  fs/aio.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/aio.c b/fs/aio.c
> index 3c249b938632..343fea0c6d1a 100644
> --- a/fs/aio.c
> +++ b/fs/aio.c
> @@ -567,7 +567,7 @@ static int aio_setup_ring(struct kioctx *ctx, unsigned 
int
> nr_events) ctx->user_id = ctx->mmap_base;
>  	ctx->nr_events = nr_events; /* trusted copy */
> 
> -	ring = kmap_atomic(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> +	ring = kmap_local_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
>  	ring->nr = nr_events;	/* user copy */
>  	ring->id = ~0U;
>  	ring->head = ring->tail = 0;
> @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ static int aio_setup_ring(struct kioctx *ctx, unsigned 
int
> nr_events) ring->compat_features = AIO_RING_COMPAT_FEATURES;
>  	ring->incompat_features = AIO_RING_INCOMPAT_FEATURES;
>  	ring->header_length = sizeof(struct aio_ring);
> -	kunmap_atomic(ring);
> +	kunmap_local(ring);
>  	flush_dcache_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> 
>  	return 0;
> @@ -678,9 +678,9 @@ static int ioctx_add_table(struct kioctx *ctx, struct
> mm_struct *mm) * we are protected from page migration
>  					 * changes ring_pages by -
>ring_lock.
>  					 */
> -					ring = kmap_atomic(ctx-
>ring_pages[0]);
> +					ring = kmap_local_page(ctx-
>ring_pages[0]);
>  					ring->id = ctx->id;
> -					kunmap_atomic(ring);
> +					kunmap_local(ring);
>  					return 0;
>  				}
> 
> @@ -1024,9 +1024,9 @@ static void user_refill_reqs_available(struct kioctx
> *ctx) * against ctx->completed_events below will make sure we do the
>  		 * safe/right thing.
>  		 */
> -		ring = kmap_atomic(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> +		ring = kmap_local_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
>  		head = ring->head;
> -		kunmap_atomic(ring);
> +		kunmap_local(ring);
> 
>  		refill_reqs_available(ctx, head, ctx->tail);
>  	}
> @@ -1132,12 +1132,12 @@ static void aio_complete(struct aio_kiocb *iocb)
>  	if (++tail >= ctx->nr_events)
>  		tail = 0;
> 
> -	ev_page = kmap_atomic(ctx->ring_pages[pos / AIO_EVENTS_PER_PAGE]);
> +	ev_page = kmap_local_page(ctx->ring_pages[pos / 
AIO_EVENTS_PER_PAGE]);
>  	event = ev_page + pos % AIO_EVENTS_PER_PAGE;
> 
>  	*event = iocb->ki_res;
> 
> -	kunmap_atomic(ev_page);
> +	kunmap_local(ev_page);
>  	flush_dcache_page(ctx->ring_pages[pos / AIO_EVENTS_PER_PAGE]);
> 
>  	pr_debug("%p[%u]: %p: %p %Lx %Lx %Lx\n", ctx, tail, iocb,
> @@ -1151,10 +1151,10 @@ static void aio_complete(struct aio_kiocb *iocb)
> 
>  	ctx->tail = tail;
> 
> -	ring = kmap_atomic(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> +	ring = kmap_local_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
>  	head = ring->head;
>  	ring->tail = tail;
> -	kunmap_atomic(ring);
> +	kunmap_local(ring);
>  	flush_dcache_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> 
>  	ctx->completed_events++;
> @@ -1214,10 +1214,10 @@ static long aio_read_events_ring(struct kioctx *ctx,
>  	mutex_lock(&ctx->ring_lock);
> 
>  	/* Access to ->ring_pages here is protected by ctx->ring_lock. */
> -	ring = kmap_atomic(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> +	ring = kmap_local_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
>  	head = ring->head;
>  	tail = ring->tail;
> -	kunmap_atomic(ring);
> +	kunmap_local(ring);
> 
>  	/*
>  	 * Ensure that once we've read the current tail pointer, that
> @@ -1249,10 +1249,10 @@ static long aio_read_events_ring(struct kioctx *ctx,
>  		avail = min(avail, nr - ret);
>  		avail = min_t(long, avail, AIO_EVENTS_PER_PAGE - pos);
> 
> -		ev = kmap(page);
> +		ev = kmap_local_page(page);
>  		copy_ret = copy_to_user(event + ret, ev + pos,
>  					sizeof(*ev) * avail);
> -		kunmap(page);
> +		kunmap_local(ev);
> 
>  		if (unlikely(copy_ret)) {
>  			ret = -EFAULT;
> @@ -1264,9 +1264,9 @@ static long aio_read_events_ring(struct kioctx *ctx,
>  		head %= ctx->nr_events;
>  	}
> 
> -	ring = kmap_atomic(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> +	ring = kmap_local_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
>  	ring->head = head;
> -	kunmap_atomic(ring);
> +	kunmap_local(ring);
>  	flush_dcache_page(ctx->ring_pages[0]);
> 
>  	pr_debug("%li  h%u t%u\n", ret, head, tail);
> --
> 2.36.1

Al, Benjamin,

I'm sending a gentle ping for this old patch too (and thanking Al again for 
pointing me out how fs/ufs and fs/sysv conversions must be reworked and 
mistakes fixed).

About this I've had Ira's and Jeff's "Reviewed-by:" tags. I also responded in 
this thread to a couple of objections from Jeff which were regarding some 
ambiguities in the commit message.

Please let me know if here too there are mistakes which must be fixed and code 
to be reworked.

I'm currently just a little more than a pure hobbyist, therefore please be 
patient for the time it takes because until mid February 2023 I'll only be 
able to work few hours per weeks using my spare time. 

I'm looking forward to hearing from you.

Regards,

Fabio