linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	mgorman@techsingularity.net, osalvador@suse.de, vbabka@suse.cz,
	william.lam@bytedance.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: compaction: fix the possible deadlock when isolating hugetlb pages
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2023 12:31:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230313123102.52118e6007f21c45063fbe79@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230313170838.GA3044@monkey>

On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 10:08:38 -0700 Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> wrote:

> I suspect holding the lru lock when calling isolate_or_dissolve_huge_page was
> not considered.  However, I wonder if this can really happen in practice?
> 
> Before the code below, there is this:
> 
> 		/*
> 		 * Periodically drop the lock (if held) regardless of its
> 		 * contention, to give chance to IRQs. Abort completely if
> 		 * a fatal signal is pending.
> 		 */
> 		if (!(low_pfn % COMPACT_CLUSTER_MAX)) {
> 			if (locked) {
> 				unlock_page_lruvec_irqrestore(locked, flags);
> 				locked = NULL;
> 			}
> 			...
> 		}
> 
> It would seem that the pfn of a hugetlb page would always be a multiple of
> COMPACT_CLUSTER_MAX so we would drop the lock.  However, I am not sure if
> that is ALWAYS true and would prefer something like the code you suggested.
> 
> Did you actually see this deadlock in practice?

Presumably the lack of lockdep reports about this tells us something?


  reply	other threads:[~2023-03-13 19:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-13 10:37 [PATCH 1/2] mm: compaction: consider the number of scanning compound pages in isolate fail path Baolin Wang
2023-03-13 10:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: compaction: fix the possible deadlock when isolating hugetlb pages Baolin Wang
2023-03-13 17:08   ` Mike Kravetz
2023-03-13 19:31     ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2023-03-14  4:11     ` Baolin Wang
2023-03-14 17:27       ` Mike Kravetz
2023-03-15  1:27         ` Baolin Wang
2023-03-15 17:17   ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-03-15 15:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: compaction: consider the number of scanning compound pages in isolate fail path Vlastimil Babka
2023-03-16  9:53   ` Baolin Wang

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=20230313123102.52118e6007f21c45063fbe79@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=william.lam@bytedance.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