[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e166e925-508e-3830-574f-59b2d2cf2431@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 20:36:37 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Donald Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Liang Zhang <zhangliang5@...wei.com>,
Pedro Gomes <pedrodemargomes@...il.com>,
Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@...il.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 10/15] mm/page-flags: reuse PG_slab as
PG_anon_exclusive for PageAnon() pages
On 11.03.22 20:22, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 10:46 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> - PG_has_hwpoisoned = PG_mappedtodisk,
>> + PG_has_hwpoisoned = PG_waiters,
>
> That makes me too nervous for words. PG_waiters is very subtle.
Yes, but PG_has_hwpoisoned is located on the second subpage of a
compound page, not on the head page.
>
> Not only is it magical in bit location ways (and the special
> clear_bit_unlock_is_negative_byte() macro that *literally* exists only
> for unlocking a page), it just ends up having fairly subtle semantics
> with intentionally racy clearing etc.
>
> Mixing that up with any hwpoison bits - that aren't used by any normal
> mortals and thus get very little coverage - just sounds horribly
> horribly wrong.
I used PG_error before, but felt like using a bit that is never ever
valid to be set/cleared/checked on a subpage would be even a better fit:
Note the:
PAGEFLAG(Waiters, waiters, PF_ONLY_HEAD) __CLEARPAGEFLAG(Waiters, waiters, PF_ONLY_HEAD)
whereby PF_ONLY_HEAD translates to:
"for compound page, callers only ever operate on the head page."
I can just switch to PG_error, but for the second subpage, PG_waiters
should be just fine (unless I am missing something important).
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists