[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201004223921.GA48517@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 01:39:21 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>,
Jordan Hand <jorhand@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@...hat.com>,
Chunyang Hui <sanqian.hcy@...fin.com>,
Seth Moore <sethmo@...gle.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
asapek@...gle.com, bp@...en8.de, cedric.xing@...el.com,
chenalexchen@...gle.com, conradparker@...gle.com,
cyhanish@...gle.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
kai.svahn@...el.com, kmoy@...gle.com, ludloff@...gle.com,
luto@...nel.org, nhorman@...hat.com, puiterwijk@...hat.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de, yaozhangx@...gle.com,
mikko.ylinen@...el.com, willy@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v39 16/24] x86/sgx: Add a page reclaimer
On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 01:23:49PM -0500, Haitao Huang wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Oct 2020 08:32:45 -0500, Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 12:22:47AM -0500, Haitao Huang wrote:
> > > When I turn on CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, kernel reports following
> > > suspicious RCU
> > > usages. Not sure if it is an issue. Just reporting here:
> >
> > I'm glad to hear that my tip helped you to get us the data.
> >
> > This does not look like an issue in the page reclaimer, which was not
> > obvious for me before. That's a good thing. I was really worried about
> > that because it has been very stable for a long period now. The last
> > bug fix for the reclaimer was done in June in v31 version of the patch
> > set and after that it has been unchanged (except possibly some renames
> > requested by Boris).
> >
> > I wildly guess I have a bad usage pattern for xarray. I migrated to it
> > in v36, and it is entirely possible that I've misused it. It was the
> > first time that I ever used it. Before xarray we had radix_tree but
> > based Matthew Wilcox feedback I did a migration to xarray.
> >
> > What I'd ask you to do next is to, if by any means possible, to try to
> > run the same test with v35 so we can verify this. That one still has
> > the radix tree.
> >
>
>
> v35 does not cause any such warning messages from kernel
Thank you. Looks like Matthew already located the issue, a fix will
land soon.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists