From: Jiaqi Yan <jiaqiyan@google.com>
To: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev>
Cc: mike.kravetz@oracle.com, naoya.horiguchi@nec.com,
songmuchun@bytedance.com, shy828301@gmail.com,
linmiaohe@huawei.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
duenwen@google.com, axelrasmussen@google.com,
jthoughton@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/hwpoison: delete all entries before traversal in __folio_free_raw_hwp
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2023 13:59:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACw3F52R8oUNP50dfy35m1KED82NKgKcHKk3ev4O+4nqhFVdzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230630145217.GA2213127@ik1-406-35019.vs.sakura.ne.jp>
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 7:52 AM Naoya Horiguchi
<naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 04:40:12PM +0000, Jiaqi Yan wrote:
> > Traversal on llist (e.g. llist_for_each_safe) is only safe AFTER entries
> > are deleted from the llist.
> >
> > llist_del_all are lock free with itself. folio_clear_hugetlb_hwpoison()s
> > from __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio and memory_failure won't need
> > explicit locking when freeing the raw_hwp_list.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiaqi Yan <jiaqiyan@google.com>
>
> (Sorry if stupid question...) folio_set_hugetlb_hwpoison() also calls
> llist_for_each_safe() but it still traverses the list without calling
> llist_del_all(). This convention applies only when removing item(s)?
I think in our previous discussion, Mike and I agree as of today's
code in hugetlb.c and memory-failure.c, concurrent adding, deleting,
traversing are fine with each other and with themselves [1], but new
code need to be careful wrt ops on raw_hwp_list.
This patch is a low-hanging fruit to ensure any caller of
__folio_free_raw_hwp won't introduce any problem by correcting one
thing in __folio_free_raw_hwp: since it wants to delete raw_hwp_page
entries in the list, it should do it by first llist_del_all, and then
kfree with a llist_for_each_safe.
As for folio_set_hugetlb_hwpoison, I am not very comfortable fixing
it. I imagine a way to fix it is llist_del_all() =>
llist_for_each_safe{...} => llist_add_batch(), or llist_add() within
llist_for_each_safe{...}. I haven't really thought through if this is
a correct fix.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CACw3F51o1ZFSYZa+XLnk4Wwjy2w_q=Kn+aOQs0=qpfG-ZYDFKg@mail.gmail.com/#t
>
> Thanks,
> Naoya Horiguchi
>
> > ---
> > mm/memory-failure.c | 8 +++-----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> > index 004a02f44271..c415c3c462a3 100644
> > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> > @@ -1825,12 +1825,11 @@ static inline struct llist_head *raw_hwp_list_head(struct folio *folio)
> >
> > static unsigned long __folio_free_raw_hwp(struct folio *folio, bool move_flag)
> > {
> > - struct llist_head *head;
> > - struct llist_node *t, *tnode;
> > + struct llist_node *t, *tnode, *head;
> > unsigned long count = 0;
> >
> > - head = raw_hwp_list_head(folio);
> > - llist_for_each_safe(tnode, t, head->first) {
> > + head = llist_del_all(raw_hwp_list_head(folio));
> > + llist_for_each_safe(tnode, t, head) {
> > struct raw_hwp_page *p = container_of(tnode, struct raw_hwp_page, node);
> >
> > if (move_flag)
> > @@ -1840,7 +1839,6 @@ static unsigned long __folio_free_raw_hwp(struct folio *folio, bool move_flag)
> > kfree(p);
> > count++;
> > }
> > - llist_del_all(head);
> > return count;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.41.0.162.gfafddb0af9-goog
> >
> >
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-30 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-23 16:40 [PATCH v2 0/4] Improve hugetlbfs read on HWPOISON hugepages Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-23 16:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/hwpoison: delete all entries before traversal in __folio_free_raw_hwp Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-30 14:52 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2023-06-30 20:59 ` Jiaqi Yan [this message]
2023-07-02 23:50 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2023-07-05 23:35 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-07-06 18:11 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-06-23 16:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/hwpoison: check if a subpage of a hugetlb folio is raw HWPOISON Jiaqi Yan
2023-07-05 23:57 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-07-06 18:25 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-07-06 22:06 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-07-07 1:27 ` Jiaqi Yan
2023-07-07 1:06 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2023-06-23 16:40 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] hugetlbfs: improve read HWPOISON hugepage Jiaqi Yan
2023-07-06 22:09 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-07-07 0:28 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2023-06-23 16:40 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] selftests/mm: add tests for HWPOISON hugetlbfs read Jiaqi Yan
2023-07-06 23:22 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-07-07 0:51 ` Naoya Horiguchi
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=CACw3F52R8oUNP50dfy35m1KED82NKgKcHKk3ev4O+4nqhFVdzg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jiaqiyan@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=duenwen@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@linux.dev \
--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