linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] mm/khugepaged: retry with sync writeback for MADV

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: <7a42515f-ae57-4f4d-831c-87689930a797@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 01:17:51 +0530
From: "Garg, Shivank" <shivankg@....com>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>, Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
 "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Nico Pache
 <npache@...hat.com>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
 Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>,
 Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
 Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Branden Moore <Branden.Moore@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] mm/khugepaged: retry with sync writeback for
 MADV_COLLAPSE



On 1/11/2026 4:59 PM, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote:
> On 1/10/26 19:20, Garg, Shivank wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/9/2026 8:16 PM, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote:
>>> On 12/15/25 09:46, Shivank Garg wrote:

>>>
>>> This looks a bit complicated. Can't we move that handing up, where we have most of that
>>> information already? Or am I missing something important?
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/khugepaged.c b/mm/khugepaged.c
>>> index 97d1b2824386f..c7271877c5220 100644
>>> --- a/mm/khugepaged.c
>>> +++ b/mm/khugepaged.c
>>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>>>   #include <linux/dax.h>
>>>   #include <linux/ksm.h>
>>>   #include <linux/pgalloc.h>
>>> +#include <linux/backing-dev.h>
>>>     #include <asm/tlb.h>
>>>   #include "internal.h"
>>> @@ -2786,7 +2787,9 @@ int madvise_collapse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long start,
>>>            for (addr = hstart; addr < hend; addr += HPAGE_PMD_SIZE) {
>>>                  int result = SCAN_FAIL;
>>> +               bool triggered_wb = false;
>>>   +retry:
>>>                  if (!mmap_locked) {
>>>                          cond_resched();
>>>                          mmap_read_lock(mm);
>>> @@ -2809,6 +2812,16 @@ int madvise_collapse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long start,
>>>                          mmap_locked = false;
>>            
>>               *lock_dropped = true;
>>>                          result = hpage_collapse_scan_file(mm, addr, file, pgoff,
>>>                                                            cc);
>>> +
>>> +                       if (result == SCAN_PAGE_DIRTY_OR_WRITEBACK && !triggered_wb &&
>>> +                           mapping_can_writeback(file->f_mapping)) {
>>> +                               loff_t lstart = (loff_t)pgoff << PAGE_SHIFT;
>>> +                               loff_t lend = lstart + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE - 1;
>>> +
>>> +                               filemap_write_and_wait_range(file->f_mapping, lstart, lend);
>>> +                               triggered_wb = true;
>>
>>                   fput(file);
>>
>>> +                               goto retry;
>>> +                       }
>>>                          fput(file);
>>>                  } else {
>>>                          result = hpage_collapse_scan_pmd(mm, vma, addr,
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for the suggestion, this approach looks much simpler.
>>
>> There are two small nits I observed:
> 
> Yeah, was a quick untested hack to see if this can be simplified :)
> 
>>
>> 1. In the retry loop, it is possible that we reacquire the mmap_lock and set
>>     mmap_locked to true. This can cause issues later when we do:
>>
>>         if (!mmap_locked)
>>                 *lock_dropped = true;
> 
> That whole logic of having two variables that express whether locks have been taken/dropped is just absolutely confusing. Any way we can clean that up?
>
>>
>>     because the caller would no longer see that the lock was dropped earlier.
>>
>> 2. We need an fput() to balance the file reference taken at line 2795.
> 
> Ah, yes, makes sense. Having a single fput() would be nicer, but that would require yet another temporary variable.
>

I agree, that this interaction for lock taken/droped is confusing.
However, a proper clean-up would require refactoring the locking logic across multiple functions in the collapse call-flow path.
This seems significantly more invasive and risky.

I would like to handle this refactoring but in a separate TODO for later.
Could we please proceed with these minimal changes for now?

Since, V4 has been in the linux-next/mm-unstable for a while, should I send a v5 or an incremental clean-up on top for this?

Thanks,
Shivank