| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 08:59:24 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: ysxie@...mail.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, hannes@...xchg.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com,
arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, vkuznets@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
guohanjun@...wei.com, qiuxishi@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] mm/migration: make isolate_movable_page() return
int type
On Wed 01-02-17 15:48:21, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hi Yisheng,
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:06:18PM +0800, ysxie@...mail.com wrote:
> > From: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@...wei.com>
> >
> > This patch changes the return type of isolate_movable_page()
> > from bool to int. It will return 0 when isolate movable page
> > successfully, return -EINVAL when the page is not a non-lru movable
> > page, and for other cases it will return -EBUSY.
> >
> > There is no functional change within this patch but prepare
> > for later patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@...wei.com>
> > Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
>
> Sorry for missing this one you guys were discussing.
> I don't understand the patch's goal although I read later patches.
The point is that the failed isolation has to propagate error up the
call chain to the userspace which has initiated the migration.
> isolate_movable_pages returns success/fail so that's why I selected
> bool rather than int but it seems you guys want to propagate more
> detailed error to the user so added -EBUSY and -EINVAL.
>
> But the question is why isolate_lru_pages doesn't have -EINVAL?
It doesn't have to same as isolate_movable_pages. We should just return
EBUSY when the page is no longer movable.
> Secondly, madvise man page should update?
Why?
> Thirdly, if a driver fail isolation due to -ENOMEM, it should be
> propagated, too?
Yes
> if we want to propagte detailed error to user, driver's isolate_page
> function should return right error.
Yes
> I don't feel this all changes should be done now. What's the problem
> if we change isolate_lru_page from int to bool? it returns just binary
> value so it should be right place to use bool. If it fails, error val
> is just -EBUSY.
We really want to propagate the reason why the offline operation has
failed. Why would we want to postpone that?
> > Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
> > CC: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
> > ---
> > include/linux/migrate.h | 2 +-
> > mm/compaction.c | 2 +-
> > mm/migrate.c | 11 +++++++----
> > 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/migrate.h b/include/linux/migrate.h
> > index ae8d475..43d5deb 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/migrate.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/migrate.h
> > @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ extern int migrate_page(struct address_space *,
> > struct page *, struct page *, enum migrate_mode);
> > extern int migrate_pages(struct list_head *l, new_page_t new, free_page_t free,
> > unsigned long private, enum migrate_mode mode, int reason);
> > -extern bool isolate_movable_page(struct page *page, isolate_mode_t mode);
> > +extern int isolate_movable_page(struct page *page, isolate_mode_t mode);
> > extern void putback_movable_page(struct page *page);
> >
> > extern int migrate_prep(void);
> > diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> > index 949198d..1d89147 100644
> > --- a/mm/compaction.c
> > +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> > @@ -802,7 +802,7 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
> > locked = false;
> > }
> >
> > - if (isolate_movable_page(page, isolate_mode))
> > + if (!isolate_movable_page(page, isolate_mode))
> > goto isolate_success;
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
> > index 87f4d0f..bbbd170 100644
> > --- a/mm/migrate.c
> > +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> > @@ -74,8 +74,9 @@ int migrate_prep_local(void)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -bool isolate_movable_page(struct page *page, isolate_mode_t mode)
> > +int isolate_movable_page(struct page *page, isolate_mode_t mode)
> > {
> > + int ret = -EBUSY;
> > struct address_space *mapping;
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -95,8 +96,10 @@ bool isolate_movable_page(struct page *page, isolate_mode_t mode)
> > * assumes anybody doesn't touch PG_lock of newly allocated page
> > * so unconditionally grapping the lock ruins page's owner side.
> > */
> > - if (unlikely(!__PageMovable(page)))
> > + if (unlikely(!__PageMovable(page))) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > goto out_putpage;
> > + }
> > /*
> > * As movable pages are not isolated from LRU lists, concurrent
> > * compaction threads can race against page migration functions
> > @@ -125,14 +128,14 @@ bool isolate_movable_page(struct page *page, isolate_mode_t mode)
> > __SetPageIsolated(page);
> > unlock_page(page);
> >
> > - return true;
> > + return 0;
> >
> > out_no_isolated:
> > unlock_page(page);
> > out_putpage:
> > put_page(page);
> > out:
> > - return false;
> > + return ret;
> > }
> >
> > /* It should be called on page which is PG_movable */
> > --
> > 1.9.1
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> > the body to majordomo@...ck.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists