From patchwork Fri Aug 9 22:58:26 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Ira Weiny X-Patchwork-Id: 1145006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=vger.kernel.org (client-ip=209.132.180.67; helo=vger.kernel.org; envelope-from=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46510W1s7Bz9sN4 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2019 08:59:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730467AbfHIW7C (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Aug 2019 18:59:02 -0400 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:25557 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730376AbfHIW7C (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Aug 2019 18:59:02 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2019 15:59:00 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,367,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="186799457" Received: from iweiny-desk2.sc.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.3.52.157]) by orsmga002-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2019 15:59:00 -0700 From: ira.weiny@intel.com To: Andrew Morton Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Dan Williams , Matthew Wilcox , Jan Kara , "Theodore Ts'o" , John Hubbard , Michal Hocko , Dave Chinner , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Ira Weiny Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 12/19] mm/gup: Prep put_user_pages() to take an vaddr_pin struct Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 15:58:26 -0700 Message-Id: <20190809225833.6657-13-ira.weiny@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 In-Reply-To: <20190809225833.6657-1-ira.weiny@intel.com> References: <20190809225833.6657-1-ira.weiny@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org From: Ira Weiny Once callers start to use vaddr_pin the put_user_pages calls will need to have access to this data coming in. Prep put_user_pages() for this data. Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny --- include/linux/mm.h | 20 +------- mm/gup.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h index befe150d17be..9d37cafbef9a 100644 --- a/include/linux/mm.h +++ b/include/linux/mm.h @@ -1064,25 +1064,7 @@ static inline void put_page(struct page *page) __put_page(page); } -/** - * put_user_page() - release a gup-pinned page - * @page: pointer to page to be released - * - * Pages that were pinned via get_user_pages*() must be released via - * either put_user_page(), or one of the put_user_pages*() routines - * below. This is so that eventually, pages that are pinned via - * get_user_pages*() can be separately tracked and uniquely handled. In - * particular, interactions with RDMA and filesystems need special - * handling. - * - * put_user_page() and put_page() are not interchangeable, despite this early - * implementation that makes them look the same. put_user_page() calls must - * be perfectly matched up with get_user_page() calls. - */ -static inline void put_user_page(struct page *page) -{ - put_page(page); -} +void put_user_page(struct page *page); void put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages, bool make_dirty); diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c index a7a9d2f5278c..10cfd30ff668 100644 --- a/mm/gup.c +++ b/mm/gup.c @@ -24,30 +24,41 @@ #include "internal.h" -/** - * put_user_pages_dirty_lock() - release and optionally dirty gup-pinned pages - * @pages: array of pages to be maybe marked dirty, and definitely released. - * @npages: number of pages in the @pages array. - * @make_dirty: whether to mark the pages dirty - * - * "gup-pinned page" refers to a page that has had one of the get_user_pages() - * variants called on that page. - * - * For each page in the @pages array, make that page (or its head page, if a - * compound page) dirty, if @make_dirty is true, and if the page was previously - * listed as clean. In any case, releases all pages using put_user_page(), - * possibly via put_user_pages(), for the non-dirty case. - * - * Please see the put_user_page() documentation for details. - * - * set_page_dirty_lock() is used internally. If instead, set_page_dirty() is - * required, then the caller should a) verify that this is really correct, - * because _lock() is usually required, and b) hand code it: - * set_page_dirty_lock(), put_user_page(). - * - */ -void put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages, - bool make_dirty) +static void __put_user_page(struct vaddr_pin *vaddr_pin, struct page *page) +{ + page = compound_head(page); + + /* + * For devmap managed pages we need to catch refcount transition from + * GUP_PIN_COUNTING_BIAS to 1, when refcount reach one it means the + * page is free and we need to inform the device driver through + * callback. See include/linux/memremap.h and HMM for details. + */ + if (put_devmap_managed_page(page)) + return; + + if (put_page_testzero(page)) + __put_page(page); +} + +static void __put_user_pages(struct vaddr_pin *vaddr_pin, struct page **pages, + unsigned long npages) +{ + unsigned long index; + + /* + * TODO: this can be optimized for huge pages: if a series of pages is + * physically contiguous and part of the same compound page, then a + * single operation to the head page should suffice. + */ + for (index = 0; index < npages; index++) + __put_user_page(vaddr_pin, pages[index]); +} + +static void __put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct vaddr_pin *vaddr_pin, + struct page **pages, + unsigned long npages, + bool make_dirty) { unsigned long index; @@ -58,7 +69,7 @@ void put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages, */ if (!make_dirty) { - put_user_pages(pages, npages); + __put_user_pages(vaddr_pin, pages, npages); return; } @@ -86,9 +97,58 @@ void put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages, */ if (!PageDirty(page)) set_page_dirty_lock(page); - put_user_page(page); + __put_user_page(vaddr_pin, page); } } + +/** + * put_user_page() - release a gup-pinned page + * @page: pointer to page to be released + * + * Pages that were pinned via get_user_pages*() must be released via + * either put_user_page(), or one of the put_user_pages*() routines + * below. This is so that eventually, pages that are pinned via + * get_user_pages*() can be separately tracked and uniquely handled. In + * particular, interactions with RDMA and filesystems need special + * handling. + * + * put_user_page() and put_page() are not interchangeable, despite this early + * implementation that makes them look the same. put_user_page() calls must + * be perfectly matched up with get_user_page() calls. + */ +void put_user_page(struct page *page) +{ + __put_user_page(NULL, page); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_user_page); + +/** + * put_user_pages_dirty_lock() - release and optionally dirty gup-pinned pages + * @pages: array of pages to be maybe marked dirty, and definitely released. + * @npages: number of pages in the @pages array. + * @make_dirty: whether to mark the pages dirty + * + * "gup-pinned page" refers to a page that has had one of the get_user_pages() + * variants called on that page. + * + * For each page in the @pages array, make that page (or its head page, if a + * compound page) dirty, if @make_dirty is true, and if the page was previously + * listed as clean. In any case, releases all pages using put_user_page(), + * possibly via put_user_pages(), for the non-dirty case. + * + * Please see the put_user_page() documentation for details. + * + * set_page_dirty_lock() is used internally. If instead, set_page_dirty() is + * required, then the caller should a) verify that this is really correct, + * because _lock() is usually required, and b) hand code it: + * set_page_dirty_lock(), put_user_page(). + * + */ +void put_user_pages_dirty_lock(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages, + bool make_dirty) +{ + __put_user_pages_dirty_lock(NULL, pages, npages, make_dirty); +} EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_user_pages_dirty_lock); /** @@ -102,15 +162,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_user_pages_dirty_lock); */ void put_user_pages(struct page **pages, unsigned long npages) { - unsigned long index; - - /* - * TODO: this can be optimized for huge pages: if a series of pages is - * physically contiguous and part of the same compound page, then a - * single operation to the head page should suffice. - */ - for (index = 0; index < npages; index++) - put_user_page(pages[index]); + __put_user_pages(NULL, pages, npages); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(put_user_pages);