From: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: "Jiaqi Yan" <jiaqiyan@google.com>,
"HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)" <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>,
"songmuchun@bytedance.com" <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
"shy828301@gmail.com" <shy828301@gmail.com>,
"linmiaohe@huawei.com" <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"duenwen@google.com" <duenwen@google.com>,
"axelrasmussen@google.com" <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
"jthoughton@google.com" <jthoughton@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] mm/hwpoison: find subpage in hugetlb HWPOISON list
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2023 17:23:30 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230619082330.GA1612447@ik1-406-35019.vs.sakura.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230617225927.GA3540@monkey>
On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 03:59:27PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 06/16/23 19:18, Jiaqi Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 4:35 PM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> wrote:
> > > On 06/16/23 14:19, Jiaqi Yan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now looking again this, I think concurrent adding and deleting are
> > > > fine with each other and with themselves, because raw_hwp_list is
> > > > lock-less llist.
> > >
> > > Correct.
> > >
> > > > As for synchronizing traversal with adding and deleting, I wonder is
> > > > it a good idea to make __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio hold
> > > > hugetlb_lock before it folio_clear_hugetlb_hwpoison(which traverse +
> > > > delete raw_hwp_list)? In hugetlb, get_huge_page_for_hwpoison already
> > > > takes hugetlb_lock; it seems to me __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio is
> > > > missing the lock.
> > >
> > > I do not think the lock is needed. However, while looking more closely
> > > at this I think I discovered another issue.
> > > This is VERY subtle.
> > > Perhaps Naoya can help verify if my reasoning below is correct.
> > >
> > > In __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio we are not operating on a hugetlb page.
> > > Why is this?
> > > Before calling update_and_free_hugetlb_folio we call remove_hugetlb_folio.
> > > The purpose of remove_hugetlb_folio is to remove the huge page from the
> > > list AND compound page destructor indicating this is a hugetlb page is changed.
> > > This is all done while holding the hugetlb lock. So, the test for
> > > folio_test_hugetlb(folio) is false.
> > >
> > > We have technically a compound non-hugetlb page with a non-null raw_hwp_list.
> > >
> > > Important note: at this time we have not reallocated vmemmap pages if
> > > hugetlb page was vmemmap optimized. That is done later in
> > > __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > The 'good news' is that after this point get_huge_page_for_hwpoison will
> > > not recognize this as a hugetlb page, so nothing will be added to the
> > > list. There is no need to worry about entries being added to the list
> > > during traversal.
> > >
> > > The 'bad news' is that if we get a memory error at this time we will
> > > treat it as a memory error on a regular compound page. So,
> > > TestSetPageHWPoison(p) in memory_failure() may try to write a read only
> > > struct page. :(
> >
> > At least I think this is an issue.
> >
> > Would it help if dissolve_free_huge_page doesn't unlock hugetlb_lock
> > until update_and_free_hugetlb_folio is done, or basically until
> > dissolve_free_huge_page is done?
>
> Unfortunately, update_and_free_hugetlb_folio is designed to be called
> without locks held. This is because we can not hold any locks while
> allocating vmemmap pages.
>
> I'll try to think of some way to restructure the code. IIUC, this is a
> potential general issue, not just isolated to memory error handling.
Considering this issue as one specific to memory error handling, checking
HPG_vmemmap_optimized in __get_huge_page_for_hwpoison() might be helpful to
detect the race. Then, an idea like the below diff (not tested) can make
try_memory_failure_hugetlb() retry (with retaking hugetlb_lock) to wait
for complete the allocation of vmemmap pages.
@@ -1938,8 +1938,11 @@ int __get_huge_page_for_hwpoison(unsigned long pfn, int flags,
int ret = 2; /* fallback to normal page handling */
bool count_increased = false;
- if (!folio_test_hugetlb(folio))
+ if (!folio_test_hugetlb(folio)) {
+ if (folio_test_hugetlb_vmemmap_optimized(folio))
+ ret = -EBUSY;
goto out;
+ }
if (flags & MF_COUNT_INCREASED) {
ret = 1;
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
> --
> Mike Kravetz
>
> >
> > TestSetPageHWPoison in memory_failure is called after
> > try_memory_failure_hugetlb, and folio_test_hugetlb is tested within
> > __get_huge_page_for_hwpoison, which is wrapped by the hugetlb_lock. So
> > by the time dissolve_free_huge_page returns, subpages already go
> > through hugetlb_vmemmap_restore and __destroy_compound_gigantic_folio
> > and become non-compound raw pages (folios). Now
> > folio_test_hugetlb(p)=false will be correct for memory_failure, and it
> > can recover p as a dissolved non-hugetlb page.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-19 8:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-17 16:09 [PATCH v1 0/3] Improve hugetlbfs read on HWPOISON hugepages Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-17 16:09 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] mm/hwpoison: find subpage in hugetlb HWPOISON list Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-17 23:53 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-05-19 20:54 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-19 22:42 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-05-22 4:50 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2023-05-22 18:22 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-23 2:43 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
2023-05-26 0:28 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-10 5:48 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-12 4:19 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2023-06-16 21:19 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-16 23:34 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-06-17 2:18 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-17 22:59 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-06-19 8:23 ` Naoya Horiguchi [this message]
2023-06-20 18:05 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-06-20 22:39 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-06-23 0:45 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-23 4:19 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-06-23 16:40 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-17 16:09 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] hugetlbfs: improve read HWPOISON hugepage Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-18 22:18 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-05-19 20:54 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-17 16:09 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] selftests/mm: add tests for HWPOISON hugetlbfs read Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-23 7:35 ` kernel test robot
2023-05-17 23:30 ` [PATCH v1 0/3] Improve hugetlbfs read on HWPOISON hugepages Mike Kravetz
2023-05-18 16:02 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-18 16:10 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-05-18 22:24 ` Mike Kravetz
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=20230619082330.GA1612447@ik1-406-35019.vs.sakura.ne.jp \
--to=naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=duenwen@google.com \
--cc=jiaqiyan@google.com \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=naoya.horiguchi@nec.com \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=songmuchun@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