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  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]
Date:   Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:15:12 -0500
From:   Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Qian Cai <cai@....pw>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: compaction: avoid fast_isolate_around() to set
 pageblock_skip on reserved pages

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 11:05:14AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> I agree that this is sub-optimal, as such pages are impossible to detect
> (PageReserved is just not clear as discussed with Andrea). The basic
> question is how we want to proceed:
> 
> a) Make sure any online struct page has a valid nid/zid, and is spanned
> by the nid/zid.
> b) Use a fake nid that will bail out when used for page_zone() and
> page_pgdat(), and make pfn walkers detect that.
> 
> AFAIU, Andrea seems to prefer a). I thing b) might be easier in corner
> cases. Thoughts?

Yes that's a good summary.

My reason I slightly prefer a) is that it will perform faster at
runtime.

I seen also the proposed patch that adds the pfn_to_page embedded in
pfn_valid to show those pfn as invalid, that is especially slow and I
don't like it for that reason. Additional bugchecks for NO_NODEID will
slowdown things too, so they should be justified by some benefit. It
concerns me if pfn_valid becomes slower.

b) will also make compaction bail out on that pageblock which it
doesn't need to so it'll provide a worse runtime to compaction as
well.

a) is what the code already does if only the e820 map range was
reserved with memblock_reserved, after applying Mike's patch to
initialize reserved memblock regions too.

It turns out the VM_BUG_ON_PAGE, as far as compaction is concerned, is
just a false positive, it detected a broken VM invariant, but it was
fine to proceed in the DEBUG_VM=n case that wouldn't crash.

Before da50c57bdbb8e37ec6f8c934a2f8acbf4e4fdfb9 the struct page
corresponding to the e820 unknown type range page wouldn't be marked
PageReserved, that also looked wrong but it was also basically harmless.

Neither of the two defects is too bad: it could be ignored if we just
remove the bugcheck, but it's just nice if the bugcheck turn out to be
correct in the pageblock.

If we initialize all RAM and non-RAM ranges in the same way, then
there's no discrepancy. Mike's patch seem to do just that by walking
the memblock.reserved memblocks in the same way as the
memblock.memory.

NOTE: I would also much prefer b) if only it would guarantee zero
runtime slowdown. (Which is I especially dislike pfn_valid internally
calling pfn_to_page)

Thanks,
Andrea

Powered by blists - more mailing lists