| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5BEF38E0-359C-4927-98EF-A0EE7DC81251@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2024 11:36:19 -0400
From: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 07/11] mm/huge_memory: convert split_huge_pages_pid()
from follow_page() to folio_walk
On 6 Aug 2024, at 6:24, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 06.08.24 12:03, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 06.08.24 11:56, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 06.08.24 11:46, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>>>> On 02/08/2024 16:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>> Let's remove yet another follow_page() user. Note that we have to do the
>>>>> split without holding the PTL, after folio_walk_end(). We don't care
>>>>> about losing the secretmem check in follow_page().
>>>>
>>>> Hi David,
>>>>
>>>> Our (arm64) CI is showing a regression in split_huge_page_test from mm selftests from next-20240805 onwards. Navigating around a couple of other lurking bugs, I was able to bisect to this change (which smells about right).
>>>>
>>>> Newly failing test:
>>>>
>>>> # # ------------------------------
>>>> # # running ./split_huge_page_test
>>>> # # ------------------------------
>>>> # # TAP version 13
>>>> # # 1..12
>>>> # # Bail out! Still AnonHugePages not split
>>>> # # # Planned tests != run tests (12 != 0)
>>>> # # # Totals: pass:0 fail:0 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>>>> # # [FAIL]
>>>> # not ok 52 split_huge_page_test # exit=1
>>>>
>>>> It's trying to split some pmd-mapped THPs then checking and finding that they are not split. The split is requested via /sys/kernel/debug/split_huge_pages, which I believe ends up in this function you are modifying here. Although I'll admit that looking at the change, there is nothing obviously wrong! Any ideas?
>>>
>>> Nothing jumps at me as well. Let me fire up the debugger :)
>>
>> Ah, very likely the can_split_folio() check expects a raised refcount
>> already.
>
> Indeed, the following does the trick! Thanks Ryan, I could have sworn
> I ran that selftest as well.
>
> TAP version 13
> 1..12
> ok 1 Split huge pages successful
> ok 2 Split PTE-mapped huge pages successful
> # Please enable pr_debug in split_huge_pages_in_file() for more info.
> # Please check dmesg for more information
> ok 3 File-backed THP split test done
>
> ...
>
>
> @Andrew, can you squash the following?
>
>
> From e5ea585de3e089ea89bf43d8447ff9fc9b371286 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 12:08:17 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] fixup: mm/huge_memory: convert split_huge_pages_pid() from
> follow_page() to folio_walk
>
> We have to teach can_split_folio() that we are not holding an additional
> reference.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> ---
> include/linux/huge_mm.h | 4 ++--
> mm/huge_memory.c | 8 ++++----
> mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
> index e25d9ebfdf89..ce44caa40eed 100644
> --- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
> @@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ unsigned long thp_get_unmapped_area_vmflags(struct file *filp, unsigned long add
> unsigned long len, unsigned long pgoff, unsigned long flags,
> vm_flags_t vm_flags);
> -bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int *pextra_pins);
> +bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int caller_pins, int *pextra_pins);
> int split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
> unsigned int new_order);
> static inline int split_huge_page(struct page *page)
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ thp_get_unmapped_area_vmflags(struct file *filp, unsigned long addr,
> }
> static inline bool
> -can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int *pextra_pins)
> +can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int caller_pins, int *pextra_pins)
> {
> return false;
> }
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index 697fcf89f975..c40b0dcc205b 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -3021,7 +3021,7 @@ static void __split_huge_page(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
> }
> /* Racy check whether the huge page can be split */
> -bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int *pextra_pins)
> +bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int caller_pins, int *pextra_pins)
> {
> int extra_pins;
> @@ -3033,7 +3033,7 @@ bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int *pextra_pins)
> extra_pins = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> if (pextra_pins)
> *pextra_pins = extra_pins;
> - return folio_mapcount(folio) == folio_ref_count(folio) - extra_pins - 1;
> + return folio_mapcount(folio) == folio_ref_count(folio) - extra_pins - caller_pins;
> }
> /*
> @@ -3201,7 +3201,7 @@ int split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
> * Racy check if we can split the page, before unmap_folio() will
> * split PMDs
> */
> - if (!can_split_folio(folio, &extra_pins)) {
> + if (!can_split_folio(folio, 1, &extra_pins)) {
> ret = -EAGAIN;
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> @@ -3537,7 +3537,7 @@ static int split_huge_pages_pid(int pid, unsigned long vaddr_start,
> * can be split or not. So skip the check here.
> */
> if (!folio_test_private(folio) &&
> - !can_split_folio(folio, NULL))
> + !can_split_folio(folio, 0, NULL))
> goto next;
> if (!folio_trylock(folio))
The diff below can skip a folio with private and extra pin(s) early instead
of trying to lock and split it then failing at can_split_folio() inside
split_huge_page_to_list_to_order().
Maybe worth applying on top of yours?
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index a218320a9233..ce992d54f1da 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -3532,13 +3532,10 @@ static int split_huge_pages_pid(int pid, unsigned long vaddr_start,
goto next;
total++;
- /*
- * For folios with private, split_huge_page_to_list_to_order()
- * will try to drop it before split and then check if the folio
- * can be split or not. So skip the check here.
- */
- if (!folio_test_private(folio) &&
- !can_split_folio(folio, 0, NULL))
+
+ if (!can_split_folio(folio,
+ folio_test_private(folio) ? 1 : 0,
+ NULL))
goto next;
if (!folio_trylock(folio))
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (855 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists