linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/4] mm/page_alloc: fix incorrect isolation behavior by rechecking migratetype

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, 24 Sep 2014 15:30:26 +0200
From:	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
	Heesub Shin <heesub.shin@...sung.com>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@...il.com>,
	t.stanislaws@...sung.com, Gioh Kim <gioh.kim@....com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/4] mm/page_alloc: fix incorrect isolation behavior
 by rechecking migratetype

On 09/15/2014 04:31 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 10:31:29AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 08/26/2014 10:08 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> index f86023b..51e0d13 100644
>>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> @@ -740,9 +740,15 @@ static void free_one_page(struct zone *zone,
>>>   	if (nr_scanned)
>>>   		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_PAGES_SCANNED, -nr_scanned);
>>>
>>> +	if (unlikely(has_isolate_pageblock(zone))) {
>>> +		migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
>>> +		if (is_migrate_isolate(migratetype))
>>> +			goto skip_counting;
>>> +	}
>>> +	__mod_zone_freepage_state(zone, 1 << order, migratetype);
>>> +
>>> +skip_counting:
>>
>> Here, wouldn't a simple 'else __mod_zone_freepage_state...' look
>> better than goto + label? (same for the following 2 patches). Or
>> does that generate worse code?
>
> To remove goto label, we need two __mod_zone_freepage_state() like
> as below. On my system, it doesn't generate worse code, but, I am not
> sure that this is true if more logic would be added. I think that
> goto + label is better.

Oh right, I missed that. It's a bit subtle, but I don't see a nicer 
solution right now.

> +	if (unlikely(has_isolate_pageblock(zone))) {
> +		migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
> +               if (!is_migrate_isolate(migratetype))
> +                       __mod_zone_freepage_state(zone, 1 << order, migratetype);
> +       } else {
> +               __mod_zone_freepage_state(zone, 1 << order, migratetype);
>          }
>

Yeah that would be uglier I guess.

> Anyway, What do you think which one is better, either v2 or v3? Still, v3? :)

Yeah v3 is much better than v1 was, and better for backporting than v2. 
The changelogs also look quite clear. The overhead shouldn't be bad with 
the per-zone flag guarding get_pfnblock_migratetype.

I'm just not sure about patch 4 and potentially leaving unmerged budies 
behind. How would it look if instead we made sure isolation works on 
whole MAX_ORDER blocks instead?

Vlastimil

> Thanks.
>

--
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/