linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: drop migrate type checks from has_unmovable

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]

Message-ID: <20171019073355.GA4486@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:33:56 +0900
From:   Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
        Reza Arbab <arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
        qiuxishi@...wei.com, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: drop migrate type checks from has_unmovable_pages

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 09:15:03AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 19-10-17 11:51:11, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 02:00:12PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > > 
> > > Michael has noticed that the memory offline tries to migrate kernel code
> > > pages when doing
> > >  echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/memory/memory0/online
> > > 
> > > The current implementation will fail the operation after several failed
> > > page migration attempts but we shouldn't even attempt to migrate
> > > that memory and fail right away because this memory is clearly not
> > > migrateable. This will become a real problem when we drop the retry loop
> > > counter resp. timeout.
> > > 
> > > The real problem is in has_unmovable_pages in fact. We should fail if
> > > there are any non migrateable pages in the area. In orther to guarantee
> > > that remove the migrate type checks because MIGRATE_MOVABLE is not
> > > guaranteed to contain only migrateable pages. It is merely a heuristic.
> > > Similarly MIGRATE_CMA does guarantee that the page allocator doesn't
> > > allocate any non-migrateable pages from the block but CMA allocations
> > > themselves are unlikely to migrateable. Therefore remove both checks.
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > This patch will break the CMA user. As you mentioned, CMA allocation
> > itself isn't migrateable. So, after a single page is allocated through
> > CMA allocation, has_unmovable_pages() will return true for this
> > pageblock. Then, futher CMA allocation request to this pageblock will
> > fail because it requires isolating the pageblock.
> 
> Hmm, does this mean that the CMA allocation path depends on
> has_unmovable_pages to return false here even though the memory is not
> movable? This sounds really strange to me and kind of abuse of this

Your understanding is correct. Perhaps, abuse or wrong function name.

> function. Which path is that? Can we do the migrate type test theres?

alloc_contig_range() -> start_isolate_page_range() ->
set_migratetype_isolate() -> has_unmovable_pages()

We can add one argument, 'XXX' to set_migratetype_isolate() and change
it to check migrate type rather than has_unmovable_pages() if 'XXX' is
specified.

Thanks.