linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: David Wang <00107082@163.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com,
	jackmanb@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, ziy@nvidia.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/codetag: sub in advance when free non-compound high order pages
Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 16:55:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0feb4309-431f-4b74-83bf-e16198798c30@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1da43908.3afc.196a0db7dc3.Coremail.00107082@163.com>

On 5/5/25 16:31, David Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> At 2025-05-05 21:12:55, "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz> wrote:
>>On 5/4/25 08:19, David Wang wrote:
>>> When page is non-compound, page[0] could be released by other
>>> thread right after put_page_testzero failed in current thread,
>>> pgalloc_tag_sub_pages afterwards would manipulate an invalid
>>> page for accounting remaining pages:
>>> 
>>> [timeline]   [thread1]                     [thread2]
>>>   |          alloc_page non-compound
>>>   V
>>>   |                                        get_page, rf counter inc
>>>   V
>>>   |          in ___free_pages
>>>   |          put_page_testzero fails
>>>   V
>>>   |                                        put_page, page released
>>>   V
>>>   |          in ___free_pages,
>>>   |          pgalloc_tag_sub_pages
>>>   |          manipulate an invalid page
>>>   V
>>>   V
>>> 
>>> Move the tag page accounting ahead, and only account remaining pages
>>> for non-compound pages with non-zero order.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: David Wang <00107082@163.com>
>>
>>Hmm, I think the problem was introduced by 51ff4d7486f0 ("mm: avoid extra
>>mem_alloc_profiling_enabled() checks"). Previously we'd get the tag pointer
>>upfront and avoid the page use-after-free.
> 
> 
> Oh, you're right. I forgot to check history......
> 
> 
>>
>>It would likely be nicer to fix it by going back to that approach for
>>___free_pages(), while hopefully keeping the optimisations of 51ff4d7486f0
>>for the other call sites where it applies?
> 
> After checking that commit, I kind of feels the changes in __free_pages are
>  the major optimization of the commit....

We could have both pgalloc_tag_get() to use in __free_page() as before
51ff4d7486f0, and keep __pgalloc_tag_get() to use in pgalloc_tag_split() and
pgalloc_tag_swap().

I think __free_page() didn't benefit from the stated purpose of "avoiding
mem_alloc_profiling_enabled() ... which is often called after that check was
already done"

> What about revert that commit and make optimization by condition checks,
> similar to what this patch did?

The downside of the condition checks is they make the code more complex and
might actually increase overhead when mem_alloc_profiling_enabled() is
false, as those checks add non-static branches outside of the static branch
that's mem_alloc_profiling_enabled().

I think __free_pages() before 51ff4d7486f0 was quite ok.

- pgalloc_tag_get() is done unconditionally, but its code is all inside the
mem_alloc_profiling_enabled() static branch so that's a no-op when profiling
is not enabled

- pgalloc_tag_sub_pages() is also all behind the static branch inside. Also
it's a very rare path anyway, most freeing should go through the
put_page_testzero() being true.

> David
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-05 14:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-04  6:19 David Wang
2025-05-05 13:12 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-05 14:31   ` David Wang
2025-05-05 14:55     ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2025-05-05 15:33       ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-05-05 16:42         ` David Wang
2025-05-05 16:53           ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-05-05 18:34             ` [PATCH v2] mm/codetag: move tag retrieval back upfront in __free_pages() David Wang
2025-05-05 19:17               ` David Wang
2025-05-05 19:30             ` [PATCH v3] " David Wang
2025-05-05 20:32               ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-05-06  7:58               ` Vlastimil Babka

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=0feb4309-431f-4b74-83bf-e16198798c30@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=00107082@163.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jackmanb@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox