From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27603C25B0E for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 07:20:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 7B6A58D0002; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 03:20:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 73F418D0001; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 03:20:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 5EA5D8D0002; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 03:20:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478238D0001 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 03:20:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin24.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17F86140873 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 07:20:23 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79815493926.24.E38157C Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) by imf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8B620002 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 07:20:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.56]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4M8ClJ152MznTV7; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 15:18:04 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.177.76] (10.174.177.76) by canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.244) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 15:20:17 +0800 Subject: Re: [bug report] mm/hugetlb: various bugs with avoid_reserve case in alloc_huge_page() To: Mike Kravetz CC: Andrew Morton , Muchun Song , Linux-MM , linux-kernel References: From: Miaohe Lin Message-ID: <5b1b60d6-e699-2330-0b6f-14c8dd5d78d4@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 15:20:17 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.177.76] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.244) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1660893621; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=c2SLN19zYfvW5ho0AVKPbr6Qc4obrWotT7+jw2ADTT0=; b=qJcjV855mFav5nuPrlFVXbq483gt3QUCqJONjWRK3rydmpCu0dF4TSRGLa0NqRjK+net+z cN3V8BoCISlrOCcOFcKNAmSyCoxUhBLTF1RMJoFYWzTijl0izbpsz8GcE+kEQSsHnJ8aXs GrECB8RND2ffS6JhUpJU43uWxzkNxBw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of linmiaohe@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linmiaohe@huawei.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1660893621; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=XysHa+ksyBuERtzkJv22w8YRIt7R9juKB2oViXAzWULRMfRQ2Nix4tyayBTKqgp0AxX9S2 zgAtYa5KrHyG8Lw+xvUhSgtsuIQBBUzKlWyV9049S1xZPAc/Fa4vFdSHWW0aojEdGRmwc6 iZh/mh0peBtNMCXleQ56ajAG2AHzhko= Authentication-Results: imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of linmiaohe@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linmiaohe@huawei.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam08 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 8C8B620002 X-Stat-Signature: b6b7ghmkcgx8q7a7y6irktba6czxrmni X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1660893621-178123 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 2022/8/19 6:43, Mike Kravetz wrote: > On 08/17/22 16:31, Miaohe Lin wrote: >> Hi all: >> When I investigate the mm/hugetlb.c code again, I found there are a few possible issues >> with avoid_reserve case. (It's really hard to follow the relevant code for me.) Please take >> a look at the below analysis: > > Thank you for taking a close look at this code! > > I agree that the code is hard to follow. I have spent many hours/days/weeks > chasing down the cause of incorrect reservation counts. I imagine there could > be more issues, especially when you add the uncommon avoid_reserve and > MAP_NORESERVE processing. Many thanks for your time and reply, Mike! > >> 1.avoid_reserve issue with h->resv_huge_pages in alloc_huge_page. > > Did you actually see this issue, or is it just based on code inspection? No, it's based on code inspection. ;) > I tried to recreate, but could not. When looking closer, this may not > even be possible. > >> Assume: >> h->free_huge_pages 60 >> h->resv_huge_pages 30 >> spool->rsv_hpages 30 > > OK. > >> >> When avoid_reserve is true, after alloc_huge_page(), we will have: > > Take a close look at the calling paths for alloc_huge_page when avoid_reserve > is true. There are only two such call paths. > 1) copy_hugetlb_page_range - We allocate pages in the 'early COW' processing. > In such cases, the pages are private and not associated with a file, or > filesystem or subpool (spool). Therefore, there should be no spool > modifications. Agree. > 2) hugetlb_wp (formerly called hugetlb_cow) - Again, we are allocating a > private page and should not be modifying spool. Agree. > > If the above is correct, then we will not modify spool->rsv_hpages which > leads to the inconsistent results. I missed to verify whether spool will be modified in avoid_reserve case. Sorry about that. > > It is confusing that MAP_NORESERVE does not imply avoid_reserve will be > passed to alloc_huge_page. It's introduced to guarantee that COW faults for a process that called mmap(MAP_PRIVATE) will succeed via commit 04f2cbe35699 ("hugetlb: guarantee that COW faults for a process that called mmap(MAP_PRIVATE) on hugetlbfs will succeed"). It seems it has nothing to do with MAP_NORESERVE. > >> spool->rsv_hpages 29 /* hugepage_subpool_get_pages decreases it. */ >> h->free_huge_pages 59 >> h->resv_huge_pages 30 /* rsv_hpages is used, but *h->resv_huge_pages is not modified accordingly*. */ >> >> If the hugetlb page is freed later, we will have: >> spool->rsv_hpages 30 /* hugepage_subpool_put_pages increases it. */ >> h->free_huge_pages 60 >> h->resv_huge_pages 31 /* *increased wrongly* due to hugepage_subpool_put_pages(spool, 1) == 0. */ >> ^^ >> > > I'll take a closer look at 2 and 3 when we determine if 1 is a possible > issue or not. I want to propose removing the avoid_reserve code. When called from above case 1) or 2), vma_needs_reservation() will always return 1 as there's no reservation for it. Also hugepage_subpool_get_pages() will always return 1 as it's not associated with a spool. So when avoid_reserve == true, map_chg and gbl_chg must be 1 and vma_has_reserves() will always return "false". As a result, passing in avoid_reserve == true will do nothing in fact. So it can be simply removed. Or am I miss something again? If avoid_reserve code can be removed, below issue 2 and 3 won't be possible as they rely on avoid_reserve doing its work. Thanks! Miaohe Lin