[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30321c02-6dc4-889f-142c-532b47a67f66@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 08:52:12 -0700
From: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>,
J�r�me Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V2] /proc/PID/smaps: Add PMD migration entry parsing
On 4/2/20 12:44 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 02-04-20 15:03:23, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu 02-04-20 10:00:31, Huang, Ying wrote:
>>>> From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
>>>>
>>>> Now, when read /proc/PID/smaps, the PMD migration entry in page table is simply
>>>> ignored. To improve the accuracy of /proc/PID/smaps, its parsing and processing
>>>> is added.
>>>>
>>>> Before the patch, for a fully populated 400 MB anonymous VMA, sometimes some THP
>>>> pages under migration may be lost as follows.
>>> Interesting. How did you reproduce this?
>>> [...]
>> I run the pmbench in background to eat memory, then run
>> `/usr/bin/migratepages` and `cat /proc/PID/smaps` every second. The
>> issue can be reproduced within 60 seconds.
> Please add that information to the changelog. I was probably too
> optimistic about the migration duration because I found it highly
> unlikely to be visible. I was clearly wrong here.
I believe that depends on the page is shared by how many processes. If
it is not shared then it should just take dozens micro seconds in my
test FYI.
>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
>>>> index 8d382d4ec067..9c72f9ce2dd8 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
>>>> @@ -546,10 +546,19 @@ static void smaps_pmd_entry(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
>>>> struct mem_size_stats *mss = walk->private;
>>>> struct vm_area_struct *vma = walk->vma;
>>>> bool locked = !!(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED);
>>>> - struct page *page;
>>>> + struct page *page = NULL;
>>>>
>>>> - /* FOLL_DUMP will return -EFAULT on huge zero page */
>>>> - page = follow_trans_huge_pmd(vma, addr, pmd, FOLL_DUMP);
>>>> + if (pmd_present(*pmd)) {
>>>> + /* FOLL_DUMP will return -EFAULT on huge zero page */
>>>> + page = follow_trans_huge_pmd(vma, addr, pmd, FOLL_DUMP);
>>>> + } else if (unlikely(thp_migration_supported() && is_swap_pmd(*pmd))) {
>>>> + swp_entry_t entry = pmd_to_swp_entry(*pmd);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (is_migration_entry(entry))
>>>> + page = migration_entry_to_page(entry);
>>>> + else
>>>> + VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
>>> Could you explain why do we need this WARN_ON? I haven't really checked
>>> the swap support for THP but cannot we have normal swap pmd entries?
>> I have some patches to add the swap pmd entry support, but they haven't
>> been merged yet.
>>
>> Similar checks are for all THP migration code paths, so I follow the
>> same style.
> I haven't checked other migration code paths but what is the reason to
> add the warning here? Even if this shouldn't happen, smaps is perfectly
> fine to ignore that situation, no?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists