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:	Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:47:21 -0800 (PST)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, compaction: avoid isolating pinned pages fix

On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> 
> > > > Okay. It can't fix your situation. Anyway, *normal* anon pages may be mapped
> > > > and have positive page_count(), so your code such as
> > > > '!page_mapping(page) && page_count(page)' makes compaction skip these *normal*
> > > > anon pages and this is incorrect behaviour.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > So how does that work with migrate_page_move_mapping() which demands 
> > > page_count(page) == 1 and the get_page_unless_zero() in 
> > > __isolate_lru_page()?
> > 
> > Before doing migrate_page_move_mapping(), try_to_unmap() is called so that all
> > mapping is unmapped. Then, remained page_count() is 1 which is grabbed by
> > __isolate_lru_page(). Am I missing something?
> > 
> 
> Ah, good point.  I wonder if we can get away with 
> page_count(page) - page_mapcount(page) > 1 to avoid the get_user_pages() 
> pin?

Something like that.  But please go back to migrate_page_move_mapping()
to factor in what it's additionally considering.  Whether you can share
code with it, I don't know - it has to do some things under a lock you
cannot take at the preliminary stage - you haven't isolated or locked
the page yet.

There is a separate issue, that a mapping may supply its own non-default
mapping->a_ops->migratepage(): can we assume that the page_counting is
the same whatever migratepage() is in use?  I'm not sure.

If you stick to special-casing PageAnon pages, you won't face that
issue; but your proposed change would be a lot more satisfying if we
can convince ourselves that it's good for !PageAnon too.  May need a
trawl through the different migratepage() methods that exist in tree.

Hugh
--
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