[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f3147c23-8ea8-c262-8dcc-7982d822db41@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 15:13:53 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Charan Teja Kalla <charante@...eaurora.org>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vinmenon@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, page_alloc: fix core hung in free_pcppages_bulk()
On 11.08.20 15:11, Charan Teja Kalla wrote:
> Thanks David for the comments.
>
> On 8/11/2020 1:59 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 10.08.20 18:10, Charan Teja Reddy wrote:
>>> The following race is observed with the repeated online, offline and a
>>> delay between two successive online of memory blocks of movable zone.
>>>
>>> P1 P2
>>>
>>> Online the first memory block in
>>> the movable zone. The pcp struct
>>> values are initialized to default
>>> values,i.e., pcp->high = 0 &
>>> pcp->batch = 1.
>>>
>>> Allocate the pages from the
>>> movable zone.
>>>
>>> Try to Online the second memory
>>> block in the movable zone thus it
>>> entered the online_pages() but yet
>>> to call zone_pcp_update().
>>> This process is entered into
>>> the exit path thus it tries
>>> to release the order-0 pages
>>> to pcp lists through
>>> free_unref_page_commit().
>>> As pcp->high = 0, pcp->count = 1
>>> proceed to call the function
>>> free_pcppages_bulk().
>>> Update the pcp values thus the
>>> new pcp values are like, say,
>>> pcp->high = 378, pcp->batch = 63.
>>> Read the pcp's batch value using
>>> READ_ONCE() and pass the same to
>>> free_pcppages_bulk(), pcp values
>>> passed here are, batch = 63,
>>> count = 1.
>>>
>>> Since num of pages in the pcp
>>> lists are less than ->batch,
>>> then it will stuck in
>>> while(list_empty(list)) loop
>>> with interrupts disabled thus
>>> a core hung.
>>>
>>> Avoid this by ensuring free_pcppages_bulk() called with proper count of
>>> pcp list pages.
>>>
>>> The mentioned race is some what easily reproducible without [1] because
>>> pcp's are not updated for the first memory block online and thus there
>>> is a enough race window for P2 between alloc+free and pcp struct values
>>> update through onlining of second memory block.
>>>
>>> With [1], the race is still exists but it is very much narrow as we
>>> update the pcp struct values for the first memory block online itself.
>>>
>>> [1]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11696389/
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Charan Teja Reddy <charante@...eaurora.org>
>>> ---
>>> mm/page_alloc.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> index e4896e6..25e7e12 100644
>>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> @@ -3106,6 +3106,7 @@ static void free_unref_page_commit(struct page *page, unsigned long pfn)
>>> struct zone *zone = page_zone(page);
>>> struct per_cpu_pages *pcp;
>>> int migratetype;
>>> + int high;
>>>
>>> migratetype = get_pcppage_migratetype(page);
>>> __count_vm_event(PGFREE);
>>> @@ -3128,8 +3129,19 @@ static void free_unref_page_commit(struct page *page, unsigned long pfn)
>>> pcp = &this_cpu_ptr(zone->pageset)->pcp;
>>> list_add(&page->lru, &pcp->lists[migratetype]);
>>> pcp->count++;
>>> - if (pcp->count >= pcp->high) {
>>> - unsigned long batch = READ_ONCE(pcp->batch);
>>> + high = READ_ONCE(pcp->high);
>>> + if (pcp->count >= high) {
>>> + int batch;
>>> +
>>> + batch = READ_ONCE(pcp->batch);
>>> + /*
>>> + * For non-default pcp struct values, high is always
>>> + * greater than the batch. If high < batch then pass
>>> + * proper count to free the pcp's list pages.
>>> + */
>>> + if (unlikely(high < batch))
>>> + batch = min(pcp->count, batch);
>>> +
>>> free_pcppages_bulk(zone, batch, pcp);
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>
>> I was wondering if we should rather set all pageblocks to
>> MIGRATE_ISOLATE in online_pages() before doing the online_pages_range()
>> call, and do undo_isolate_page_range() after onlining is done.
>>
>> move_pfn_range_to_zone()->memmap_init_zone() marks all pageblocks
>> MIGRATE_MOVABLE, and as that function is used also during boot, we could
>> supply a parameter to configure this.
>>
>> This would prevent another race from happening: Having pages exposed to
>> the buddy ready for allocation in online_pages_range() before the
>> sections are marked online.
>
> Yeah this is another bug. And idea of isolate first, online and undoing
> the isolation after zonelist and pcp struct update should work even for
> the mentioned issue. This needs to go as a separate fix?
Yeah, also requires more work to be done. Will add it to my list of TODOs.
>
> However, IMO, issue in free_pcppages_bulk() should be fixed by checking
> if sane count value is passed. NO?
> Posted V2: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11709225/
Yeah, I'm fine with fixing this issue that can actually be reproduced.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists