Date:	Wed, 6 May 2009 15:31:00 +0100
From:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hartleys@...ionengravers.com,
	mcrapet@...il.com, linux@....linux.org.uk, fred99@...olina.rr.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Double check memmap is actually valid with a memmap
	has unexpected holes

On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 01:06:53PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hi Mel,
> 
> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 09:29:44AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > pfn_valid() is meant to be able to tell if a given PFN has valid memmap
> > associated with it or not. In FLATMEM, it is expected that holes always
> > have valid memmap as long as there is valid PFNs either side of the hole.
> > In SPARSEMEM, it is assumed that a valid section has a memmap for the
> > entire section.
> > 
> > However, ARM and maybe other embedded architectures in the future free
> > memmap backing holes to save memory on the assumption the memmap is never
> > used. The page_zone() linkages are then broken even though pfn_valid()
> > returns true. A walker of the full memmap in this case must do additional
> > check to ensure the memmap they are looking at is sane by making sure the
> > zone and PFN linkages are still valid. This is expensive, but walkers of
> > the full memmap are extremely rare.
> > 
> > This was caught before for FLATMEM and hacked around but it hits again
> > for SPARSEMEM because the page_zone() linkages can look ok where the PFN
> > linkages are totally screwed. This looks like a hatchet job but the reality
> > is that any clean solution would end up consuming all the memory saved
> > by punching these unexpected holes in the memmap. For example, we tried
> > marking the memmap within the section invalid but the section size exceeds
> > the size of the hole in most cases so pfn_valid() starts returning false
> > where valid memmap exists. Shrinking the size of the section would increase
> > memory consumption offsetting the gains.
> > 
> > This patch identifies when an architecture is punching unexpected holes
> > in the memmap that the memory model cannot automatically detect. When set,
> > walkers of the full memmap must call memmap_valid_within() for each PFN and
> > passing in what it expects the page and zone to be for that PFN. If it finds
> > the linkages to be broken, it assumes the memmap is invalid for that PFN.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
> 
> I think we also need to fix up show_mem(). 

As it turns out, ARM has its own show_mem(). I don't see how, but ARM
must not be using lib/show_mem.c even though it compiles it.

> Attached is a
> compile-tested patch, please have a look.  I am not sure about memory
> hotplug issues but on a quick glance the vmstat stuff seems to be
> optimistic as well.
> 
> ---
> From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> Subject: lib: adjust show_mem() to support memmap holes
> 
> Some architectures free the backing of mem_map holes.  pfn_valid() is
> not able to report this properly, so a stronger check is needed if the
> caller is about to use the page descriptor derived from a pfn.
> 
> Change the node walking to zone walking and use memmap_valid_within()
> to check for holes.  This is reliable as it additionally checks for
> page_zone() and page_to_pfn() coherency.
> 
> Not-yet-signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> ---
>  lib/show_mem.c |   21 +++++++++------------
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/show_mem.c b/lib/show_mem.c
> index 238e72a..ed3c3ec 100644
> --- a/lib/show_mem.c
> +++ b/lib/show_mem.c
> @@ -11,29 +11,27 @@
>  
>  void show_mem(void)
>  {
> -	pg_data_t *pgdat;
>  	unsigned long total = 0, reserved = 0, shared = 0,
>  		nonshared = 0, highmem = 0;
> +	struct zone *zone;
>  
>  	printk(KERN_INFO "Mem-Info:\n");
>  	show_free_areas();
>  
> -	for_each_online_pgdat(pgdat) {
> -		unsigned long i, flags;
> +	for_each_populated_zone(zone) {
> +		unsigned long start = zone->zone_start_pfn;
> +		unsigned long end = start + zone->spanned_pages;

The patch appears to be doing two things

o Scanning zones instead of pgdats
o Adding the use of memmap_valid_within()

Scanning zones instead of pgdats seems like a good idea on its own and should
be split out for separate consideration.

> +		unsigned long pfn;
>  
> -		pgdat_resize_lock(pgdat, &flags);

How sure are you about removing the acquisition of this lock?  If anything,
it appears that pagetypeinfo_showblockcount_print() should be taking this lock.

> -		for (i = 0; i < pgdat->node_spanned_pages; i++) {
> -			struct page *page;
> -			unsigned long pfn = pgdat->node_start_pfn + i;
> +		for (pfn = start; pfn < end; pfn++) {
> +			struct page *page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
>  

You need to check pfn_valid() before using pfn_to_page().

> -			if (unlikely(!(i % MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES)))
> +			if (unlikely(!(pfn % MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES)))
>  				touch_nmi_watchdog();
>  
> -			if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
> +			if (!memmap_valid_within(pfn, page, zone))
>  				continue;
>  

You need both the pfn_valid() check and the memmap_valid_within() as
memmap_valid_within() unconditionally returns 1 for most architectures. If
you applied this patch as-is, memory holes in a zone will cause big problems -
random results at best and invalid memory references at worst.

> -			page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
> -
>  			if (PageHighMem(page))
>  				highmem++;
>  
> @@ -46,7 +44,6 @@ void show_mem(void)
>  
>  			total++;
>  		}
> -		pgdat_resize_unlock(pgdat, &flags);
>  	}
>  
>  	printk(KERN_INFO "%lu pages RAM\n", total);
> -- 
> 1.6.2.1.135.gde769
> 

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists