From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <ke.wang@unisoc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: fix logic error of bulkfree_pcp_prepare
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 15:35:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220913153543.c8094b34fe9ddabba4599e7a@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1663049446-22310-1-git-send-email-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 14:10:45 +0800 "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com> wrote:
> From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
>
> free_pages_check return 0 when result is ok while bulkfree_pcp_prepare
> treat it as false wrongly.
It's called check_free_page().
And that's a poor name because the name doesn't communicate what a
true/false return value means - was the page good or bad?
So I'd propose this renaming:
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: mm/page_alloc.c: rename check_free_page() to free_page_is_bad()
Date: Tue Sep 13 03:20:48 PM PDT 2022
The name "check_free_page()" provides no information regarding its return
value when the page is indeed found to be bad.
Renaming it to "free_page_is_bad()" makes it clear that a `true' return
value means the page was bad.
And make it return a bool, not an int.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 18 +++++++++---------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c~a
+++ a/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1290,20 +1290,20 @@ static const char *page_bad_reason(struc
return bad_reason;
}
-static void check_free_page_bad(struct page *page)
+static void free_page_bad_report(struct page *page)
{
bad_page(page,
page_bad_reason(page, PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_FREE));
}
-static inline int check_free_page(struct page *page)
+static inline bool free_page_bad(struct page *page)
{
if (likely(page_expected_state(page, PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_FREE)))
- return 0;
+ return false;
/* Something has gone sideways, find it */
- check_free_page_bad(page);
- return 1;
+ free_page_bad_report(page);
+ return true;
}
static int free_tail_pages_check(struct page *head_page, struct page *page)
@@ -1436,7 +1436,7 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_p
for (i = 1; i < (1 << order); i++) {
if (compound)
bad += free_tail_pages_check(page, page + i);
- if (unlikely(check_free_page(page + i))) {
+ if (unlikely(free_page_bad(page + i))) {
bad++;
continue;
}
@@ -1448,7 +1448,7 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_p
if (memcg_kmem_enabled() && PageMemcgKmem(page))
__memcg_kmem_uncharge_page(page, order);
if (check_free)
- bad += check_free_page(page);
+ bad += free_page_bad(page);
if (bad)
return false;
@@ -1510,7 +1510,7 @@ static bool free_pcp_prepare(struct page
static bool bulkfree_pcp_prepare(struct page *page)
{
if (debug_pagealloc_enabled_static())
- return check_free_page(page);
+ return free_page_bad(page);
else
return false;
}
@@ -1531,7 +1531,7 @@ static bool free_pcp_prepare(struct page
static bool bulkfree_pcp_prepare(struct page *page)
{
- return check_free_page(page);
+ return free_page_bad(page);
}
#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_VM */
_
And bulkfree_pcp_prepare() is pretty bad as well - how about we
document the dang return value?
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c~b
+++ a/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1507,6 +1507,7 @@ static bool free_pcp_prepare(struct page
return free_pages_prepare(page, order, true, FPI_NONE);
}
+/* return true if this page has an inappropriate state */
static bool bulkfree_pcp_prepare(struct page *page)
{
if (debug_pagealloc_enabled_static())
_
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1424,7 +1424,7 @@ static bool free_pcp_prepare(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
> static bool bulkfree_pcp_prepare(struct page *page)
> {
> if (debug_pagealloc_enabled_static())
> - return check_free_page(page);
> + return !check_free_page(page);
> else
> return false;
> }
> @@ -1445,7 +1445,7 @@ static bool free_pcp_prepare(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>
> static bool bulkfree_pcp_prepare(struct page *page)
> {
> - return check_free_page(page);
> + return !check_free_page(page);
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_VM */
And after clarifying these things, your patch seems incorrect.
free_pcppages_bulk() does
if (bulkfree_pcp_prepare(page))
continue;
in other words, it leaks the page if it was found to be messed up?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-13 22:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-13 6:10 zhaoyang.huang
2022-09-13 6:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: introduce __GFP_TRACKLEAK to track in-kernel allocation zhaoyang.huang
2022-09-13 22:35 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
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=20220913153543.c8094b34fe9ddabba4599e7a@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=huangzhaoyang@gmail.com \
--cc=ke.wang@unisoc.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.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