From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD9C0C433F5 for ; Fri, 20 May 2022 22:56:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3D6A76B0071; Fri, 20 May 2022 18:56:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 35E3A6B0072; Fri, 20 May 2022 18:56:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 1B14A6B0073; Fri, 20 May 2022 18:56:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 050B16B0071 for ; Fri, 20 May 2022 18:56:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin02.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5744202AA for ; Fri, 20 May 2022 22:56:04 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79487631048.02.7DA88F8 Received: from NAM04-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn8nam08on2067.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.100.67]) by imf28.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0525C001B for ; Fri, 20 May 2022 22:55:35 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=AXQBQosuAKMiZwOIGrW6XgxajlSJQmxU84XWxfSZ7PXXV27jH6fhVf1ZaRTZs4xG3n8Qdp6S0gexXFFeIw+klQQI5ZLQjoNPY3QldIvqW5OpARFtohRdtYDGPC8FzuP65xD28XWFh+UOKHs2rlN7AJ3A2O3PCjId0TfWHOv1bx6J+JPAFDr69DyExe9HduL408cwt7lEiVKPncNo2FnfnCsYBkkvYt8Alu/PLP4vACWRsxQAAcPTEyIkKhz48R1YCpQfrVdDnKg7OAY6uJZY8XJgK+BRYUQpifueOPVN56xcFyyV2e80GfjN2aeLUWm5AovtM98CXUZ1TYJvKBHU7A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=m9HAESxkrZ7Gg1QIihjGV1zSpT5JVObrsuaw3JUv3nY=; b=QvUiy/1pCqft2U9k0lbqkL+0qW8QtaPfl8hmBfYqhP63YQCL64OrknBU5HnbzpPnmJNbcLKEh5WetmhUc84IUkjqnIJd5zLkY4WOB/FxtUAGOF0MzjMUjhQWnCDmXimvMVS7Nn/v8Lp+VYeq0MR96APZxfYHPPSBILHonTZnSWMxi5fJPl2yFCk+vmKOL3qTHwVeCavXKBQjpKgJS0B1nGJghpt2fAkseLVOuIy6bIOtDkPp+tQVexg0vbUT1BCjwNSet8YG60wN5IOwiyQ6qvzurc5P+lhDt22xmH1sfp5LYiZ4LkJoCbTBw/ZgslPRbNAmY/MXMqJo/wiVn9SILA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass (sender ip is 12.22.5.235) smtp.rcpttodomain=googlegroups.com smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass (p=reject sp=reject pct=100) action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=none (message not signed); arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Nvidia.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=m9HAESxkrZ7Gg1QIihjGV1zSpT5JVObrsuaw3JUv3nY=; b=Q/JAOf+ddWYOig9UcmLHqz7jafmH3M/+Be4I4DaQn+g4tsI2eyvDhQUF6zCZuUNXYyipVPuhyujt6BMF0Tt0Q/ZJhVY3Hp6GSvFijx9oxgHzYjJ62nEo0VRHkGstMm4QBAID51QbGbC+/A1SipFRjwoSicMCumJykhmFopxrX6+t/QAv9m28ip1Wqy+DqnR8t0ABKbYms6ibIKANGMjpDD53JC1yMYxiiiYsWEmkq6gwFZBFdwNTgL53aarHbLHDgEEim5rW0hF/jo3y6k6kE44DjPbktm11/mEyAo4PlSAxx7jnz1I67ADaCo+e2W2p1u4V9Hex47npYb3wKVC47w== Received: from BN6PR13CA0002.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:404:10a::12) by CH2PR12MB3895.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:610:2a::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.5273.16; Fri, 20 May 2022 22:56:01 +0000 Received: from BN8NAM11FT041.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:404:10a:cafe::53) by BN6PR13CA0002.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:404:10a::12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.5206.7 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 20 May 2022 22:56:01 +0000 X-MS-Exchange-Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 12.22.5.235) smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates 12.22.5.235 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=12.22.5.235; helo=mail.nvidia.com; pr=C Received: from mail.nvidia.com (12.22.5.235) by BN8NAM11FT041.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.13.177.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.5273.14 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 20 May 2022 22:56:01 +0000 Received: from rnnvmail201.nvidia.com (10.129.68.8) by DRHQMAIL107.nvidia.com (10.27.9.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.32; Fri, 20 May 2022 22:55:54 +0000 Received: from [10.110.48.28] (10.126.231.35) by rnnvmail201.nvidia.com (10.129.68.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.986.22; Fri, 20 May 2022 15:55:53 -0700 Message-ID: <0be9132d-a928-9ebe-a9cf-6d140b907d59@nvidia.com> Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 15:56:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Subject: Re: [syzbot] WARNING in follow_hugetlb_page Content-Language: en-US To: Minchan Kim , Mike Kravetz CC: Andrew Morton , syzbot , , , , , , , , Matthew Wilcox , Stephen Rothwell , "David Hildenbrand" References: <00000000000077377c05dee75f63@google.com> <20220513102617.c464c4f566052838e911a3ec@linux-foundation.org> <75f09063-d184-7d44-17a1-ed04be5eb953@oracle.com> <20220513161910.d1b73583cdb2e33562aa86e5@linux-foundation.org> <4809b134-a37a-50b8-4c25-44548bc1048f@nvidia.com> <6d281052-485c-5e17-4f1c-ef5689831450@oracle.com> From: John Hubbard In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.126.231.35] X-ClientProxiedBy: rnnvmail201.nvidia.com (10.129.68.8) To rnnvmail201.nvidia.com (10.129.68.8) X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 03ae9d98-9433-4b3a-8c4a-08da3ab3e93b X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: CH2PR12MB3895:EE_ X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-Relay: 0 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:12.22.5.235;CTRY:US;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:mail.nvidia.com;PTR:InfoNoRecords;CAT:NONE;SFS:(13230001)(4636009)(36840700001)(40470700004)(46966006)(53546011)(6666004)(54906003)(83380400001)(110136005)(508600001)(2906002)(40460700003)(82310400005)(186003)(31686004)(47076005)(36756003)(81166007)(8676002)(4326008)(70586007)(70206006)(2616005)(26005)(316002)(31696002)(8936002)(36860700001)(5660300002)(16526019)(356005)(7416002)(16576012)(86362001)(426003)(336012)(43740500002)(36900700001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101; X-OriginatorOrg: Nvidia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 May 2022 22:56:01.1178 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 03ae9d98-9433-4b3a-8c4a-08da3ab3e93b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[12.22.5.235];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com] X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN8NAM11FT041.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CH2PR12MB3895 Authentication-Results: imf28.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=Nvidia.com header.s=selector2 header.b="Q/JAOf+d"; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=nvidia.com; spf=none (imf28.hostedemail.com: domain of jhubbard@nvidia.com has no SPF policy when checking 40.107.100.67) smtp.mailfrom=jhubbard@nvidia.com X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D0525C001B X-Stat-Signature: t1puj165fpsgb94t81ichrgdhcmtb7q8 X-HE-Tag: 1653087335-123349 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 5/20/22 15:19, Minchan Kim wrote: > The memory offline would be an issue so we shouldn't allow pinning of any > pages in *movable zone*. > > Isn't alloc_contig_range just best effort? Then, it wouldn't be a big > problem to allow pinning on those area. The matter is what target range > on alloc_contig_range is backed by CMA or movable zone and usecases. > > IOW, movable zone should be never allowed. But CMA case, if pages > are used by normal process memory instead of hugeTLB, we shouldn't > allow longterm pinning since someone can claim those memory suddenly. > However, we are fine to allow longterm pinning if the CMA memory > already claimed and mapped at userspace(hugeTLB case IIUC). > From Mike's comments and yours, plus a rather quick reading of some CMA-related code in mm/hugetlb.c (free_gigantic_page(), alloc_gigantic_pages()), the following seems true: a) hugetlbfs can allocate pages *from* CMA, via cma_alloc() b) while hugetlbfs is using those CMA-allocated pages, it is debatable whether those pages should be allowed to be long term pinned. That's because there are two cases: Case 1: pages are longterm pinned, then released, all while owned by hugetlbfs. No problem. Case 2: pages are longterm pinned, but then hugetlbfs releases the pages entirely (via unmounting hugetlbfs, I presume). In this case, we now have CMA page that are long-term pinned, and that's the state we want to avoid. The reason it is debatable is that hugetlbfs is intended to be used long term, itself. The expected use cases do not normally include a lot of short term mounting and unmounting. And whichever way that debate goes, we need to allow it to be fixable, by not tying "is pinnable" to "using gup/pup". The caller has the context that is needed to make that policy decision, but gup/pup does not. At this point, I think it's time to fix up the problems and restore previous behavior, by choosing Case 1 behavior for now. And also lifting the is_pinnable_page() checks up a level, as noted in my other thread. I can do that, unless someone sees a flaw in the reasoning. thanks, -- John Hubbard NVIDIA