[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250409135843.2012726-1-joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 06:58:43 -0700
From: Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@...il.com>
To: Wupeng Ma <mawupeng1@...wei.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mike.kravetz@...cle.com,
david@...hat.com,
muchun.song@...ux.dev,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: hugetlb: Fix incorrect fallback for subpool
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 14:16:34 +0800 Wupeng Ma <mawupeng1@...wei.com> wrote:
> During our testing with hugetlb subpool enabled, we observe that
> hstate->resv_huge_pages may underflow into negative values. Root cause
> analysis reveals a race condition in subpool reservation fallback handling
> as follow:
>
> hugetlb_reserve_pages()
> /* Attempt subpool reservation */
> gbl_reserve = hugepage_subpool_get_pages(spool, chg);
>
> /* Global reservation may fail after subpool allocation */
> if (hugetlb_acct_memory(h, gbl_reserve) < 0)
> goto out_put_pages;
>
> out_put_pages:
> /* This incorrectly restores reservation to subpool */
> hugepage_subpool_put_pages(spool, chg);
>
> When hugetlb_acct_memory() fails after subpool allocation, the current
> implementation over-commits subpool reservations by returning the full
> 'chg' value instead of the actual allocated 'gbl_reserve' amount. This
> discrepancy propagates to global reservations during subsequent releases,
> eventually causing resv_huge_pages underflow.
>
> This problem can be trigger easily with the following steps:
> 1. reverse hugepage for hugeltb allocation
> 2. mount hugetlbfs with min_size to enable hugetlb subpool
> 3. alloc hugepages with two task(make sure the second will fail due to
> insufficient amount of hugepages)
> 4. with for a few seconds and repeat step 3 which will make
> hstate->resv_huge_pages to go below zero.
>
> To fix this problem, return corrent amount of pages to subpool during the
> fallback after hugepage_subpool_get_pages is called.
>
> Fixes: 1c5ecae3a93f ("hugetlbfs: add minimum size accounting to subpools")
> Signed-off-by: Wupeng Ma <mawupeng1@...wei.com>
> ---
Hi Wupeng,
I hope you are doing well! It's been a while since this fix was sent in, and
there hasn't been any comments on the test either. Would you consider sending
this patch again without the RFC tag? I think that might help in the way of
moving this patch forward : -)
Thank you again for this fix! Have a great day!
Joshua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists