linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] mm/page_alloc: Remove unnecessary page == NULL check in rmqueue

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1b478a71-7de1-2097-7006-634d51f3fda1@suse.cz>
Date:   Thu, 19 May 2022 14:26:09 +0200
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzju@...hat.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] mm/page_alloc: Remove unnecessary page == NULL check
 in rmqueue

On 5/19/22 14:13, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 12:57:01PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 5/12/22 10:50, Mel Gorman wrote:
>>> The VM_BUG_ON check for a valid page can be avoided with a simple
>>> change in the flow. The ZONE_BOOSTED_WATERMARK is unlikely in general
>>> and even more unlikely if the page allocation failed so mark the
>>> branch unlikely.
>>
>> Hm, so that makes a DEBUG_VM config avoid the check. On the other hand,
>> it puts it on the path returning from rmqueue_pcplist() for all configs,
>> and that should be the fast path. So unless things further change in the
>> following patches, it doesn't seem that useful?
>>
> 
> You're right -- the fast path ends up with both a if
> (page) and if (!page) checks. Andrew, can you drop the patch
> mm-page_alloc-remove-unnecessary-page-==-null-check-in-rmqueue.patch from
> your tree please?
> 
> Originally the flow was important when I was writing the patch and later
> became unnecessary. However, it reminded me of another problem I thought
> of when writing this and then forgotten to note it in the changelog. If
> the page allocation fails then ZONE_BOOSTED_WATERMARK should still be
> tested and cleared before waking kswapd. It could happen if an allocation
> attempt tried to fallback to another migratetype and still fail to find
> a suitable page. This is true whether going through the PCP lists or not.
> 
> So what do you think of me adding this patch to a follow-up series?

LGTM.

> 
> --8<--
> mm/page_alloc: Remove mistaken page == NULL check in rmqueue
> 
> If a page allocation fails, the ZONE_BOOSTER_WATERMARK should be tested,
> cleared and kswapd woken whether the allocation attempt was via the PCP
> or directly via the buddy list.
> 
> Remove the page == NULL so the ZONE_BOOSTED_WATERMARK bit is checked
> unconditionally. As it is unlikely that ZONE_BOOSTED_WATERMARK is set,
> mark the branch accordingly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>

Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>

> ---
>  mm/page_alloc.c | 4 +---
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 1c4c54503a5d..61d5bc2efffe 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3765,12 +3765,10 @@ struct page *rmqueue(struct zone *preferred_zone,
>  
>  	page = rmqueue_buddy(preferred_zone, zone, order, alloc_flags,
>  							migratetype);
> -	if (unlikely(!page))
> -		return NULL;
>  
>  out:
>  	/* Separate test+clear to avoid unnecessary atomics */
> -	if (test_bit(ZONE_BOOSTED_WATERMARK, &zone->flags)) {
> +	if (unlikely(test_bit(ZONE_BOOSTED_WATERMARK, &zone->flags))) {
>  		clear_bit(ZONE_BOOSTED_WATERMARK, &zone->flags);
>  		wakeup_kswapd(zone, 0, 0, zone_idx(zone));
>  	}
>