linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2] memory-hotplug: remove MIGRATE_ISOLATE from free_area->free

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 06 Sep 2012 17:01:12 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
CC:	Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] memory-hotplug: remove MIGRATE_ISOLATE from free_area->free_list

On 09/06/2012 04:18 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hello Lai,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 04:14:51PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> On 09/06/2012 10:53 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>> Normally, MIGRATE_ISOLATE type is used for memory-hotplug.
>>> But it's irony type because the pages isolated would exist
>>> as free page in free_area->free_list[MIGRATE_ISOLATE] so people
>>> can think of it as allocatable pages but it is *never* allocatable.
>>> It ends up confusing NR_FREE_PAGES vmstat so it would be
>>> totally not accurate so some of place which depend on such vmstat
>>> could reach wrong decision by the context.
>>>
>>> There were already report about it.[1]
>>> [1] 702d1a6e, memory-hotplug: fix kswapd looping forever problem
>>>
>>> Then, there was other report which is other problem.[2]
>>> [2] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg41251.html
>>>
>>> I believe it can make problems in future, too.
>>> So I hope removing such irony type by another design.
>>>
>>> I hope this patch solves it and let's revert [1] and doesn't need [2].
>>>
>>> * Changelog v1
>>>  * Fix from Michal's many suggestion
>>>
>>> Cc: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>
>>> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
>>> Cc: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>>> Cc: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
>>> Cc: Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>
>>> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
>>> ---
>>
>>> @@ -180,30 +287,35 @@ int undo_isolate_page_range(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
>>>   * all pages in [start_pfn...end_pfn) must be in the same zone.
>>>   * zone->lock must be held before call this.
>>>   *
>>> - * Returns 1 if all pages in the range are isolated.
>>> + * Returns true if all pages in the range are isolated.
>>>   */
>>> -static int
>>> -__test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>>> +static bool
>>> +__test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>>>  {
>>> +	unsigned long pfn, next_pfn;
>>>  	struct page *page;
>>>  
>>> -	while (pfn < end_pfn) {
>>> -		if (!pfn_valid_within(pfn)) {
>>> -			pfn++;
>>> -			continue;
>>> -		}
>>> -		page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
>>> -		if (PageBuddy(page))
>>> -			pfn += 1 << page_order(page);
>>> -		else if (page_count(page) == 0 &&
>>> -				page_private(page) == MIGRATE_ISOLATE)
>>> -			pfn += 1;
>>> -		else
>>> -			break;
>>> +	list_for_each_entry(page, &isolated_pages, lru) {
>>
>>> +		if (&page->lru == &isolated_pages)
>>> +			return false;
>>
>> what's the mean of this line?
> 
> I just copied it from Michal's code but It seem to be not needed.
> I will remove it in next spin.
> 
>>
>>> +		pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
>>> +		if (pfn >= end_pfn)
>>> +			return false;



>>> +		if (pfn >= start_pfn)
>>> +			goto found;

this test is wrong.

use this:

if ((pfn <= start_pfn) && (start_pfn < pfn + (1UL << page_order(page))))
	goto found;

if (pfn > start_pfn)
	return false;


>>> +	}
>>> +	return false;
>>> +
>>> +	list_for_each_entry_continue(page, &isolated_pages, lru) {
>>> +		if (page_to_pfn(page) != next_pfn)
>>> +			return false;
>>
>> where is next_pfn init-ed? 
> 
> by "goto found"

don't goto inner label.

move the found label up:

+
+found:
+	next_pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
+	list_for_each_entry_from(page, &isolated_pages, lru) {
+		if (page_to_pfn(page) != next_pfn)
+			return false;
+		pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
+		next_pfn = pfn + (1UL << page_order(page));
+		if (next_pfn >= end_pfn)
+			return true;
 	}
--
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/