Re: Bad use of highmem with buffer_migrate_page?

[Rabin Vincent <rabin@rab.in>]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 5/11/2012 1:30 AM, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> On Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:08 PM Laura Abbott wrote:
>>> I did a backport of the Contiguous Memory Allocator to a 3.0.8 tree. I
>>> wrote fairly simple test case that, in 1MB chunks, allocs up to 40MB
>>> from a reserved area, maps, writes, unmaps and then frees in an infinite
>>> loop. When running this with another program in parallel to put some
>>> stress on the filesystem, I hit data aborts in the filesystem/journal
>>> layer, although not always the same backtrace. As an example:
>>>
>>> [<c02907a4>] (__ext4_check_dir_entry+0x20/0x184) from [<c029e1a8>]
>>> (add_dirent_to_buf+0x70/0x2ac)
>>> [<c029e1a8>] (add_dirent_to_buf+0x70/0x2ac) from [<c029f3f0>]
>>> (ext4_add_entry+0xd8/0x4bc)
>>> [<c029f3f0>] (ext4_add_entry+0xd8/0x4bc) from [<c029fe90>]
>>> (ext4_add_nondir+0x14/0x64)
>>> [<c029fe90>] (ext4_add_nondir+0x14/0x64) from [<c02a04c4>]
>>> (ext4_create+0xd8/0x120)
>>> [<c02a04c4>] (ext4_create+0xd8/0x120) from [<c022e134>]
>>> (vfs_create+0x74/0xa4)
>>> [<c022e134>] (vfs_create+0x74/0xa4) from [<c022ed3c>]
>>> (do_last+0x588/0x8d4)
>>> [<c022ed3c>] (do_last+0x588/0x8d4) from [<c022fe64>]
>>> (path_openat+0xc4/0x394)
>>> [<c022fe64>] (path_openat+0xc4/0x394) from [<c0230214>]
>>> (do_filp_open+0x30/0x7c)
>>> [<c0230214>] (do_filp_open+0x30/0x7c) from [<c0220cb4>]
>>> (do_sys_open+0xd8/0x174)
>>> [<c0220cb4>] (do_sys_open+0xd8/0x174) from [<c0105ea0>]
>>> (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x30)
>>>
>>> Every panic had the same issue where a struct buffer_head [1] had a
>>> b_data that was unexpectedly NULL.
>>>
>>> During the course of CMA, buffer_migrate_page could be called to migrate
>>> from a CMA page to a new page. buffer_migrate_page calls set_bh_page[2]
>>> to set the new page for the buffer_head. If the new page is a highmem
>>> page though, the bh->b_data ends up as NULL, which could produce the
>>> panics seen above.
>>>
>>> This seems to indicate that highmem pages are not not appropriate for
>>> use as pages to migrate to. The following made the problem go away for
>>> me:
>>>
>>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> @@ -5753,7 +5753,7 @@ static struct page *
>>>    __alloc_contig_migrate_alloc(struct page *page, unsigned long private,
>>>                                int **resultp)
>>>    {
>>> -       return alloc_page(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE);
>>> +       return alloc_page(GFP_USER | __GFP_MOVABLE);
>>>    }
>>>
>>>
>>> Does this seem like an actual issue or is this an artifact of my
>>> backport to 3.0? I'm not familiar enough with the filesystem layer to be
>>> able to tell where highmem can actually be used.
>>
>>
>> I will need to investigate this further as this issue doesn't appear on
>> v3.3+ kernels, but I remember I saw something similar when I tried CMA
>> backported to v3.0.

The problem is still present on latest mainline.  The filesystem layer
expects that the pages in the block device's mapping are not in highmem
(the mapping's gfp mask is set in bdget()), but CMA replaces lowmem
pages with highmem pages leading to the crashes.

The above fix should work, but perhaps the following is preferable since
it should allow moving highmem pages to other highmem pages?

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 4403009..4a4f921 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -5635,7 +5635,12 @@ static struct page *
 __alloc_contig_migrate_alloc(struct page *page, unsigned long private,
 			     int **resultp)
 {
-	return alloc_page(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE);
+	gfp_t gfp_mask = GFP_USER | __GFP_MOVABLE;
+
+	if (PageHighMem(page))
+		gfp_mask |= __GFP_HIGHMEM;
+
+	return alloc_page(gfp_mask);
 }

 /* [start, end) must belong to a single zone. */

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>