[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160622223746.253109802@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:46:22 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.6 59/81] mm: thp: broken page count after commit aa88b68c3b1d
4.6-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ibm.com>
commit 770a5370226cb207461bbad902543381c1fad521 upstream.
Christian Borntraeger reported a kernel panic after corrupt page counts,
and it turned out to be a regression introduced with commit aa88b68c3b1d
("thp: keep huge zero page pinned until tlb flush"), at least on s390.
put_huge_zero_page() was moved over from zap_huge_pmd() to
release_pages(), and it was replaced by tlb_remove_page(). However,
release_pages() might not always be triggered by (the arch-specific)
tlb_remove_page().
On s390 we call free_page_and_swap_cache() from tlb_remove_page(), and
not tlb_flush_mmu() -> free_pages_and_swap_cache() like the generic
version, because we don't use the MMU-gather logic. Although both
functions have very similar names, they are doing very unsimilar things,
in particular free_page_xxx is just doing a put_page(), while
free_pages_xxx calls release_pages().
This of course results in very harmful put_page()s on the huge zero
page, on architectures where tlb_remove_page() is implemented in this
way. It seems to affect only s390 and sh, but sh doesn't have THP
support, so the problem (currently) probably only exists on s390.
The following quick hack fixed the issue:
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160602172141.75c006a9@thinkpad
Signed-off-by: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ibm.com>
Reported-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
mm/swap_state.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/mm/swap_state.c
+++ b/mm/swap_state.c
@@ -252,7 +252,10 @@ static inline void free_swap_cache(struc
void free_page_and_swap_cache(struct page *page)
{
free_swap_cache(page);
- put_page(page);
+ if (is_huge_zero_page(page))
+ put_huge_zero_page();
+ else
+ put_page(page);
}
/*
Powered by blists - more mailing lists