[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4eab92af-251a-a9aa-e270-179634d0345b@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 12:42:32 +0200
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc: brouer@...hat.com, lorenzo@...nel.org, linyunsheng@...wei.com,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, willy@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next/mm V2 1/2] page_pool: Remove workqueue in new
shutdown scheme
On 27/04/2023 22.53, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> +noinline
>> static void page_pool_empty_ring(struct page_pool *pool)
>> {
>> struct page *page;
>> @@ -796,39 +828,29 @@ static void page_pool_scrub(struct page_pool *pool)
>> page_pool_empty_ring(pool);
>> }
> So this is not in the diff context, but page_pool_empty_ring() does
> this:
>
> static void page_pool_empty_ring(struct page_pool *pool)
> {
> struct page *page;
>
> /* Empty recycle ring */
> while ((page = ptr_ring_consume_bh(&pool->ring))) {
> /* Verify the refcnt invariant of cached pages */
> if (!(page_ref_count(page) == 1))
> pr_crit("%s() page_pool refcnt %d violation\n",
> __func__, page_ref_count(page));
>
> page_pool_return_page(pool, page);
> }
> }
>
> ...and with this patch, that page_pool_return_page() call will now free
> the pool memory entirely when the last page is returned. When it does
> this, the condition in the while loop will still execute afterwards; it
> would return false, but if the pool was freed, it's now referencing
> freed memory when trying to read from pool->ring.
Yes, that sounds like a problem.
> So I think page_pool_empty_ring needs to either pull out all the pages
> in the ring to an on-stack buffer before calling page_pool_return_page()
> on them, or there needs to be some other way to break the loop early.
Let me address this one first, I'll get back to the other in another
reply. The usual/idiom way of doing this is to have a next pointer that
is populated inside the loop before freeing the object.
It should look like this (only compile tested):
static void page_pool_empty_ring(struct page_pool *pool)
{
struct page *page, *next;
next = ptr_ring_consume_bh(&pool->ring);
/* Empty recycle ring */
while (next) {
page = next;
next = ptr_ring_consume_bh(&pool->ring);
/* Verify the refcnt invariant of cached pages */
if (!(page_ref_count(page) == 1))
pr_crit("%s() page_pool refcnt %d violation\n",
__func__, page_ref_count(page));
page_pool_return_page(pool, page);
}
}
> There are a couple of other places where page_pool_return_page() is
> called in a loop where the loop variable lives inside struct page_pool,
> so we need to be absolutely sure they will never be called in the
> shutdown stage, or they'll have to be fixed as well.
The other loops are okay, but I spotted another problem in
__page_pool_put_page() in "Fallback/non-XDP mode", but that is fixable.
--Jesper
Powered by blists - more mailing lists