linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v4] mm/hotplug: silence a lockdep splat with printk()

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Fri, 17 Jan 2020 13:49:53 -0500
From:   Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        pmladek@...e.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        david@...hat.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v4] mm/hotplug: silence a lockdep splat with
 printk()



> On Jan 17, 2020, at 10:46 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Fri 17-01-20 10:05:12, Qian Cai wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jan 17, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks a lot. Having it in a separate patch would be great.
>> 
>> I was thinking about removing that WARN together in this v5 patch,
>> so there is less churn to touch the same function again. However, I
>> am fine either way, so just shout out if you feel strongly towards a
>> separate patch.
> 
> I hope you meant moving rather than removing ;). The warning is useful
> because we shouldn't see unmovable pages in the movable zone. And a
> separate patch makes more sense because the justification is slightly
> different. We do not want to have a way for userspace to trigger the
> warning from userspace - even though it shouldn't be possible, but
> still. Only the offlining path should complain.

Something like this?

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 621716a25639..32c854851e1f 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -8307,7 +8307,6 @@ struct page *has_unmovable_pages(struct zone *zone, struct page *page,
        }
        return NULL;
 unmovable:
-       WARN_ON_ONCE(zone_idx(zone) == ZONE_MOVABLE);
        return pfn_to_page(pfn + iter);
 }
 
diff --git a/mm/page_isolation.c b/mm/page_isolation.c
index e70586523ca3..08571b515d9f 100644
--- a/mm/page_isolation.c
+++ b/mm/page_isolation.c
@@ -54,9 +54,11 @@ static int set_migratetype_isolate(struct page *page, int migratetype, int isol_
 
 out:
        spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
+
        if (!ret)
                drain_all_pages(zone);
        else if ((isol_flags & REPORT_FAILURE) && unmovable)
+               WARN_ON_ONCE(zone_idx(zone) == ZONE_MOVABLE);
                /*
                 * printk() with zone->lock held will guarantee to trigger a
                 * lockdep splat, so defer it here.