linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v20 08/20] mm: page_idle_get_page() does not need lru

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: <20201102144110.GB724984@cmpxchg.org>
Date:   Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:41:10 -0500
From:   Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:     Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mgorman@...hsingularity.net,
        tj@...nel.org, hughd@...gle.com, khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru,
        daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com, willy@...radead.org, lkp@...el.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, richard.weiyang@...il.com,
        kirill@...temov.name, alexander.duyck@...il.com,
        rong.a.chen@...el.com, mhocko@...e.com, vdavydov.dev@...il.com,
        shy828301@...il.com, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 08/20] mm: page_idle_get_page() does not need lru_lock

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 06:44:53PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> 
> It is necessary for page_idle_get_page() to recheck PageLRU() after
> get_page_unless_zero(), but holding lru_lock around that serves no
> useful purpose, and adds to lru_lock contention: delete it.
> 
> See https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20150504031722.GA2768@blaptop for the
> discussion that led to lru_lock there; but __page_set_anon_rmap() now
> uses WRITE_ONCE(),

That doesn't seem to be the case in Linus's or Andrew's tree. Am I
missing a dependent patch series?

> and I see no other risk in page_idle_clear_pte_refs() using
> rmap_walk() (beyond the risk of racing PageAnon->PageKsm, mostly but
> not entirely prevented by page_count() check in ksm.c's
> write_protect_page(): that risk being shared with page_referenced()
> and not helped by lru_lock).

Isn't it possible, as per Minchan's description, for page->mapping to
point to a struct anon_vma without PAGE_MAPPING_ANON set, and rmap
thinking it's looking at a struct address_space?