Message-ID: <a4k27pleianmjbt2d5lqlmwqv7k2pujzfv75y2q564vrcdye3w@xf3wcifffxkx>
Date:   Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:13:35 +0000
From:   Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>
To:     "Yin, Fengwei" <fengwei.yin@...el.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>,
        "vishal.moola@...il.com" <vishal.moola@...il.com>,
        "wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com" <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        "minchan@...nel.org" <minchan@...nel.org>,
        "yuzhao@...gle.com" <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
        "david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>,
        "ryan.roberts@....com" <ryan.roberts@....com>,
        "shy828301@...il.com" <shy828301@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] madvise:madvise_free_pte_range(): don't use
 mapcount() against large folio for sharing check

On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 08:04:11PM +0800, Yin, Fengwei wrote:
>
>
> On 8/16/2023 7:44 PM, Daniel Gomez wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 07:30:35AM +0800, Yin Fengwei wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8/15/23 21:25, Daniel Gomez wrote:
> >>> Hi Yin,
> >>> On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 10:09:17AM +0800, Yin Fengwei wrote:
> >>>> Commit 98b211d6415f ("madvise: convert madvise_free_pte_range() to use a
> >>>> folio") replaced the page_mapcount() with folio_mapcount() to check
> >>>> whether the folio is shared by other mapping.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's not correct for large folios. folio_mapcount() returns the total
> >>>> mapcount of large folio which is not suitable to detect whether the folio
> >>>> is shared.
> >>>>
> >>>> Use folio_estimated_sharers() which returns a estimated number of shares.
> >>>> That means it's not 100% correct. It should be OK for madvise case here.
> >>>
> >>> I'm trying to understand why it should be ok for madvise this change, so
> >>> I hope it's okay to ask you few questions.
> >>>
> >>> folio_mapcount() calculates the total maps for all the subpages of a
> >>> folio. However, the folio_estimated_sharers does it only for the first
> >>> subpage making it not true for large folios. Then, wouldn't this change
> >>> drop support for large folios?
> >> I saw David explained this very well in another mail.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Seems like folio_entire_mapcount() is not accurate either because of it
> >>> does not inclue PTE-mapped sub-pages which I think we need here. Hence,
> >>> the folio_mapcount(). Could this be something missing in the test side?
> >>>
> >>> I tried to replicate the setup with CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE but
> >>> seems like I'm not able to do it:
> >>>
> >>> ./cow
> >>> # [INFO] detected THP size: 2048 KiB
> >>> # [INFO] detected hugetlb size: 2048 KiB
> >>> # [INFO] detected hugetlb size: 1048576 KiB
> >>> # [INFO] huge zeropage is enabled
> >>> TAP version 13
> >>> 1..166
> >>> # [INFO] Anonymous memory tests in private mappings
> >>> # [RUN] Basic COW after fork() ... with base page
> >>> not ok 1 MADV_NOHUGEPAGE failed
> >>> # [RUN] Basic COW after fork() ... with swapped out base page
> >>> not ok 2 MADV_NOHUGEPAGE failed
> >>> # [RUN] Basic COW after fork() ... with THP
> >>> not ok 3 MADV_HUGEPAGE failed
> >>> # [RUN] Basic COW after fork() ... with swapped-out THP
> >>> not ok 4 MADV_HUGEPAGE failed
> >>> # [RUN] Basic COW after fork() ... with PTE-mapped THP
> >>> not ok 5 MADV_HUGEPAGE failed
> >>> # [RUN] Basic COW after fork() ... with swapped-out, PTE-mapped THP
> >>> not ok 6 MADV_HUGEPAGE failed
> >>> ...
> >> Can you post the MADV_PAGEOUT and PTE-mapped THP related testing result?
> >> And I suppose swap need be enabled also for the testing.
> >
> > You may find a dump of the logs in the link below with system information. Let me
> > know if you find something wrong in my setup or if you need something else.
> > Besides CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE, CONFIG_SWAP is also enabled in the kernel.
> >
> > https://gitlab.com/-/snippets/2584135
> >
> > Also, strace reports ENOSYS for MADV_*:
> > madvise(0x7f2912465000, 4096, MADV_NOHUGEPAGE) = -1 ENOSYS (Function not implemented)
> > madvise(0x7f2912000000, 2097152, MADV_HUGEPAGE) = -1 ENOSYS (Function not implemented)
> O. The problem here is MADV_HUGEPAGE/MADV_NOHUGEPAGE doesn't work.
> Do you have CONFIG_ADVISE_SYSCALLS enabled?
It worked after I enabled the conf. Some tests failed and some were
skipped. But I managed to reproduce the issue now, thanks Yin!

Bail out! 4 out of 166 tests failed
# Totals: pass:146 fail:4 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:16 error:0

Here the full log:
https://gitlab.com/-/snippets/2584190/raw/main/cow.txt
>
> Regards
> Yin, Fengwei
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Yin, Fengwei
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Daniel
> >>>>
> >>>> User-visible effects is that the THP is skipped when user call madvise.
> >>>> But the correct behavior is THP should be split and processed then.
> >>>>
> >>>> NOTE: this change is a temporary fix to reduce the user-visible effects
> >>>> before the long term fix from David is ready.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: 98b211d6415f ("madvise: convert madvise_free_pte_range() to use a folio")
> >>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@...el.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  mm/madvise.c | 2 +-
> >>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/mm/madvise.c b/mm/madvise.c
> >>>> index 49af35e2d99a..4dded5d27e7e 100644
> >>>> --- a/mm/madvise.c
> >>>> +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> >>>> @@ -683,7 +683,7 @@ static int madvise_free_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
> >>>>  		if (folio_test_large(folio)) {
> >>>>  			int err;
> >>>>
> >>>> -			if (folio_mapcount(folio) != 1)
> >>>> +			if (folio_estimated_sharers(folio) != 1)
> >>>>  				break;
> >>>>  			if (!folio_trylock(folio))
> >>>>  				break;
> >>>> --
> >>>> 2.39.2
> >>> >

Powered by blists - more mailing lists