linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm: free zapped tail pages when splitting isolated thp

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: <3be3dacd-1f45-468f-a363-b9d3a10aeb89@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 17:14:33 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: hannes@...xchg.org, riel@...riel.com, shakeel.butt@...ux.dev,
 roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, yuzhao@...gle.com, baohua@...nel.org,
 ryan.roberts@....com, rppt@...nel.org, willy@...radead.org,
 cerasuolodomenico@...il.com, corbet@....net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
 Shuang Zhai <zhais@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm: free zapped tail pages when splitting isolated
 thp

On 30.07.24 14:46, Usama Arif wrote:
> From: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
> 
> If a tail page has only two references left, one inherited from the
> isolation of its head and the other from lru_add_page_tail() which we
> are about to drop, it means this tail page was concurrently zapped.
> Then we can safely free it and save page reclaim or migration the
> trouble of trying it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
> Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <zhais@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com>
> ---
>   mm/huge_memory.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index 0167dc27e365..76a3b6a2b796 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -2923,6 +2923,8 @@ static void __split_huge_page(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
>   	unsigned int new_nr = 1 << new_order;
>   	int order = folio_order(folio);
>   	unsigned int nr = 1 << order;
> +	LIST_HEAD(pages_to_free);
> +	int nr_pages_to_free = 0;
>   
>   	/* complete memcg works before add pages to LRU */
>   	split_page_memcg(head, order, new_order);
> @@ -3007,6 +3009,24 @@ static void __split_huge_page(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
>   		if (subpage == page)
>   			continue;
>   		folio_unlock(new_folio);
> +		/*
> +		 * If a tail page has only two references left, one inherited
> +		 * from the isolation of its head and the other from
> +		 * lru_add_page_tail() which we are about to drop, it means this
> +		 * tail page was concurrently zapped. Then we can safely free it
> +		 * and save page reclaim or migration the trouble of trying it.
> +		 */
> +		if (list && page_ref_freeze(subpage, 2)) {
> +			VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageLRU(subpage), subpage);
> +			VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageCompound(subpage), subpage);
> +			VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(page_mapped(subpage), subpage);
> +

No VM_BUG_*, VM_WARN is good enough.

> +			ClearPageActive(subpage);
> +			ClearPageUnevictable(subpage);
> +			list_move(&subpage->lru, &pages_to_free);

Most checks here should operate on new_folio instead of subpage.


-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb