linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: migrate: fix an incorrect call of prep_transhuge

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Wed, 22 Nov 2017 10:09:13 -0500
From:   Zi Yan <zi.yan@...rutgers.edu>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
CC:     Zi Yan <zi.yan@...t.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrea Reale <ar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: migrate: fix an incorrect call of prep_transhuge_page()



Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 22-11-17 09:43:46, Zi Yan wrote:
>>
>> Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Wed 22-11-17 09:54:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Mon 20-11-17 21:18:55, Zi Yan wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/migrate.h b/include/linux/migrate.h
>>>>> index 895ec0c4942e..a2246cf670ba 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/linux/migrate.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/migrate.h
>>>>> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static inline struct page *new_page_nodemask(struct page *page,
>>>>>  	new_page = __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_mask, order,
>>>>>  				preferred_nid, nodemask);
>>>>>  
>>>>> -	if (new_page && PageTransHuge(page))
>>>>> +	if (new_page && PageTransHuge(new_page))
>>>>>  		prep_transhuge_page(new_page);
>>>> I would keep the two checks consistent. But that leads to a more
>>>> interesting question. new_page_nodemask does
>>>>
>>>> 	if (thp_migration_supported() && PageTransHuge(page)) {
>>>> 		order = HPAGE_PMD_ORDER;
>>>> 		gfp_mask |= GFP_TRANSHUGE;
>>>> 	}
>>> And one more question/note. Why do we need thp_migration_supported
>>> in the first place? 9c670ea37947 ("mm: thp: introduce
>>> CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_THP_MIGRATION") says
>>> : Introduce CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_THP_MIGRATION to limit thp migration
>>> : functionality to x86_64, which should be safer at the first step.
>>>
>>> but why is unsafe to enable the feature on other arches which support
>>> THP? Is there any plan to do the next step and remove this config
>>> option?
>> Because different architectures have their own way of specifying a swap
>> entry. This means, to support THP migration, each architecture needs to
>> add its own __pmd_to_swp_entry() and __swp_entry_to_pmd(), which are
>> used for arch-independent pmd_to_swp_entry() and swp_entry_to_pmd().
> 
> I understand that part. But this smells like a matter of coding, no?
> I was suprised to see the note about safety which didn't make much sense
> to me.

And testing as well. I had powerpc book3s support in my initial patch
submission, but removed it because I do not have access to the powerpc
machine any more. I also tried ARM64, which seems working by adding the
code, but I have no hardware to test it now.

Any suggestions?

-- 
Best Regards,
Yan Zi


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (538 bytes)