On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 08:07:56AM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> There are situations where a change to a single PTE could cause the
> contpte block in which it resides to become foldable (i.e. could be
> repainted with the contiguous bit). Such situations arise, for example,
> when user space temporarily changes protections, via mprotect, for
> individual pages, such can be the case for certain garbage collectors.
> 
> We would like to detect when such a PTE change occurs. However this can
> be expensive due to the amount of checking required. Therefore only
> perform the checks when an indiviual PTE is modified via mprotect
> (ptep_modify_prot_commit() -> set_pte_at() -> set_ptes(nr=1)) and only
> when we are setting the final PTE in a contpte-aligned block.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.robe...@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 26 +++++++++++++
>  arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c          | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 90 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h 
> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> index cdc310880a3b..d3357fe4eb89 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> @@ -1192,6 +1192,8 @@ void vmemmap_update_pte(unsigned long addr, pte_t 
> *ptep, pte_t pte);
>   * where it is possible and makes sense to do so. The PTE_CONT bit is 
> considered
>   * a private implementation detail of the public ptep API (see below).
>   */
> +extern void __contpte_try_fold(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> +                             pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte);
>  extern void __contpte_try_unfold(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>                               pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte);
>  extern pte_t contpte_ptep_get(pte_t *ptep, pte_t orig_pte);
> @@ -1213,6 +1215,29 @@ extern int contpte_ptep_set_access_flags(struct 
> vm_area_struct *vma,
>                               unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep,
>                               pte_t entry, int dirty);
>  
> +static __always_inline void contpte_try_fold(struct mm_struct *mm,
> +                             unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
> +{
> +     /*
> +      * Only bother trying if both the virtual and physical addresses are
> +      * aligned and correspond to the last entry in a contig range. The core
> +      * code mostly modifies ranges from low to high, so this is the likely
> +      * the last modification in the contig range, so a good time to fold.
> +      * We can't fold special mappings, because there is no associated folio.
> +      */
> +
> +     const unsigned long contmask = CONT_PTES - 1;
> +     bool valign = ((addr >> PAGE_SHIFT) & contmask) == contmask;
> +
> +     if (unlikely(valign)) {
> +             bool palign = (pte_pfn(pte) & contmask) == contmask;
> +
> +             if (unlikely(palign &&
> +                 pte_valid(pte) && !pte_cont(pte) && !pte_special(pte)))
> +                     __contpte_try_fold(mm, addr, ptep, pte);
> +     }
> +}
> +
>  static __always_inline void contpte_try_unfold(struct mm_struct *mm,
>                               unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
>  {
> @@ -1287,6 +1312,7 @@ static __always_inline void set_ptes(struct mm_struct 
> *mm, unsigned long addr,
>       if (likely(nr == 1)) {
>               contpte_try_unfold(mm, addr, ptep, __ptep_get(ptep));
>               __set_ptes(mm, addr, ptep, pte, 1);
> +             contpte_try_fold(mm, addr, ptep, pte);
>       } else {
>               contpte_set_ptes(mm, addr, ptep, pte, nr);
>       }
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> index 80346108450b..2c7dafd0552a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,70 @@ static void contpte_convert(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned 
> long addr,
>       __set_ptes(mm, start_addr, start_ptep, pte, CONT_PTES);
>  }
>  
> +void __contpte_try_fold(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> +                     pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
> +{
> +     /*
> +      * We have already checked that the virtual and pysical addresses are
> +      * correctly aligned for a contpte mapping in contpte_try_fold() so the
> +      * remaining checks are to ensure that the contpte range is fully
> +      * covered by a single folio, and ensure that all the ptes are valid
> +      * with contiguous PFNs and matching prots. We ignore the state of the
> +      * access and dirty bits for the purpose of deciding if its a contiguous
> +      * range; the folding process will generate a single contpte entry which
> +      * has a single access and dirty bit. Those 2 bits are the logical OR of
> +      * their respective bits in the constituent pte entries. In order to
> +      * ensure the contpte range is covered by a single folio, we must
> +      * recover the folio from the pfn, but special mappings don't have a
> +      * folio backing them. Fortunately contpte_try_fold() already checked
> +      * that the pte is not special - we never try to fold special mappings.
> +      * Note we can't use vm_normal_page() for this since we don't have the
> +      * vma.
> +      */
> +
> +     unsigned long folio_saddr, folio_eaddr;
> +     unsigned long cont_saddr, cont_eaddr;
> +     pte_t expected_pte, subpte;
> +     struct folio *folio;
> +     struct page *page;
> +     unsigned long pfn;
> +     pte_t *orig_ptep;
> +     pgprot_t prot;
> +
> +     int i;
> +
> +     if (!mm_is_user(mm))
> +             return;
> +
> +     page = pte_page(pte);
> +     folio = page_folio(page);
> +     folio_saddr = addr - (page - &folio->page) * PAGE_SIZE;
> +     folio_eaddr = folio_saddr + folio_nr_pages(folio) * PAGE_SIZE;
> +     cont_saddr = ALIGN_DOWN(addr, CONT_PTE_SIZE);
> +     cont_eaddr = cont_saddr + CONT_PTE_SIZE;

I assume that the 's' in *_sddar is for "start", and the 'e' in *_eaddr is for
"end". Could we use "start" and "end" directly, e.g. folio_start, folio_end?

> +
> +     if (folio_saddr > cont_saddr || folio_eaddr < cont_eaddr)
> +             return;
> +
> +     pfn = pte_pfn(pte) - ((addr - cont_saddr) >> PAGE_SHIFT);

IIUC this should be the same as:

        pfn = ALIGN_DOWN(pte_pfn(pte), NR_CONT_PTES);

... which would align with the way we generate 'cont_saddr' above.

Otherwise, this looks good to me.

Mark.

> +     prot = pte_pgprot(pte_mkold(pte_mkclean(pte)));
> +     expected_pte = pfn_pte(pfn, prot);
> +     orig_ptep = ptep;
> +     ptep = contpte_align_down(ptep);
> +
> +     for (i = 0; i < CONT_PTES; i++) {
> +             subpte = pte_mkold(pte_mkclean(__ptep_get(ptep)));
> +             if (!pte_same(subpte, expected_pte))
> +                     return;
> +             expected_pte = pte_advance_pfn(expected_pte, 1);
> +             ptep++;
> +     }
> +
> +     pte = pte_mkcont(pte);
> +     contpte_convert(mm, addr, orig_ptep, pte);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__contpte_try_fold);
> +
>  void __contpte_try_unfold(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>                       pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
>  {
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

Reply via email to