linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Retry migration earlier upon refcount mismatch

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: <148A7C69-F204-47EE-8F2E-E963E6D9CCCE@nvidia.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:05:33 -0400
From: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org,
 willy@...radead.org, ryan.roberts@....com, anshuman.khandual@....com,
 catalin.marinas@....com, cl@...two.org, vbabka@...e.cz, mhocko@...e.com,
 apopple@...dia.com, osalvador@...e.de, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
 dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, will@...nel.org, baohua@...nel.org,
 ioworker0@...il.com, gshan@...hat.com, mark.rutland@....com,
 kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, hughd@...gle.com, aneesh.kumar@...nel.org,
 yang@...amperecomputing.com, peterx@...hat.com, broonie@...nel.org,
 mgorman@...hsingularity.net, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Retry migration earlier upon refcount mismatch

On 9 Aug 2024, at 9:47, David Hildenbrand wrote:

> On 09.08.24 12:31, Dev Jain wrote:
>> As already being done in __migrate_folio(), wherein we backoff if the
>> folio refcount is wrong, make this check during the unmapping phase, upon
>> the failure of which, the original state of the PTEs will be restored and
>> the folio lock will be dropped via migrate_folio_undo_src(), any racing
>> thread will make progress and migration will be retried.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
>> ---
>>   mm/migrate.c | 9 +++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
>> index e7296c0fb5d5..477acf996951 100644
>> --- a/mm/migrate.c
>> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
>> @@ -1250,6 +1250,15 @@ static int migrate_folio_unmap(new_folio_t get_new_folio,
>>   	}
>>    	if (!folio_mapped(src)) {
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Someone may have changed the refcount and maybe sleeping
>> +		 * on the folio lock. In case of refcount mismatch, bail out,
>> +		 * let the system make progress and retry.
>> +		 */
>> +		struct address_space *mapping = folio_mapping(src);
>> +
>> +		if (folio_ref_count(src) != folio_expected_refs(mapping, src))
>> +			goto out;
>
> This really seems to be the latest point where we can "easily" back off and unlock the source folio -- in this function :)
>
> I wonder if we should be smarter in the migrate_pages_batch() loop when we start the actual migrations via migrate_folio_move(): if we detect that a folio has unexpected references *and* it has waiters (PG_waiters), back off then and retry the folio later. If it only has unexpected references, just keep retrying: no waiters -> nobody is waiting for the lock to make progress.
>
> For example, when migrate_folio_move() fails with -EAGAIN, check if there are waiters (PG_waiter?) and undo+unlock to try again later.
>
> But I'm not really a migration expert, so only my 2 cents :)

Sounds reasonable to me. Also add Ying (the author of batch page migration).

--
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (855 bytes)