From: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Qiang Liu <liuq131@chinatelecom.cn>,
baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/compaction: remove unnecessary detection code.
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 17:21:47 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56ee8988-fd25-76bf-08a8-b84732fd2170@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b6ca5b1-f421-4dda-a2a2-865af97b2db8@suse.cz>
Hello
on 11/14/2024 3:44 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 11/14/24 07:57, Qiang Liu wrote:
>> It is impossible for the situation where blockpfn > end_pfn to arise,
>> The if statement here is not only unnecessary, but may also lead to
>> a misunderstanding that blockpfn > end_pfn could potentially happen.
>> so these unnecessary checking code should be removed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qiang Liu <liuq131@chinatelecom.cn>
>
As stride could 32, if isolate_freepages_range() is called with start_pfn not
aligned with 32, we could bail out look with blockpfn > end_pfn in
isolate_freepages_block(). Please correct if I miss something.
> I see that's since 3da0272a4c7d ("mm/compaction: correctly return failure
> with bogus compound_order in strict mode")
>
> I think that commit introduced a risk of overflow due to a bogus order
> (which we read in a racy way), and once blockpfn overflows it will satisfy
> <= end_pfn and might e.g. end up scanning a completely different zone?
>
> if (blockpfn + (1UL << order) <= end_pfn) {
>
> blockpfn += (1UL << order) - 1;
> page += (1UL << order) - 1;
> nr_scanned += (1UL << order) - 1;
> }
>
> We should better add back the MAX_ORDER sanity check?
As order of pageblock is <= MAX_ORDER, if bogus order is > MAX_ORDER, then
blockpfn + (1UL << order) must be > end_pfn, I think the sanity check is
not needed.
Thanks.
Kemeng
>
>> ---
>> mm/compaction.c | 6 ------
>> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
>> index a2b16b08cbbf..baeda7132252 100644
>> --- a/mm/compaction.c
>> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
>> @@ -682,12 +682,6 @@ static unsigned long isolate_freepages_block(struct compact_control *cc,
>> if (locked)
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cc->zone->lock, flags);
>>
>> - /*
>> - * Be careful to not go outside of the pageblock.
>> - */
>> - if (unlikely(blockpfn > end_pfn))
>> - blockpfn = end_pfn;
>> -
>> trace_mm_compaction_isolate_freepages(*start_pfn, blockpfn,
>> nr_scanned, total_isolated);
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-14 9:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-14 6:57 Qiang Liu
2024-11-14 7:44 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-11-14 7:52 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-11-14 10:06 ` Baolin Wang
2024-11-14 9:21 ` Kemeng Shi [this message]
2024-11-14 9:37 ` 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=56ee8988-fd25-76bf-08a8-b84732fd2170@huaweicloud.com \
--to=shikemeng@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liuq131@chinatelecom.cn \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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