linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	"Sang, Oliver" <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
	 Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	"oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev" <oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev>,
	lkp <lkp@intel.com>,
	 "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	 "Song, Youquan" <youquan.song@intel.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	 John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
	 Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	 Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	 "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
	 "Yin, Fengwei" <fengwei.yin@intel.com>,
	hongjiu.lu@intel.com
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [hugetlb] 7118fc2906: kernel_BUG_at_lib/list_debug.c
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2023 10:25:17 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiS84nS9apjs_Vt=jjZ_+j+F8HQ3B+ABSvbzcqtW9x5Kg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y8aSc5xGO+rW2pyo@feng-clx>

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:22 AM Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com> wrote:
>
> With the following patch to use 'O1' instead 'O2' gcc optoin for
> page_alloc.c, the list corruption issue can't be reproduced for
> commit 7118fc2906 in 1000 runs.

Ugh.

It would be lovely if you could just narrow it down with

  #pragma GCC optimize ("O1")
 ...
  #pragma GCC optimize ("O2")

around just that prep_compound_page(), but when I tried it myself I
get some function attribute mismatch errors.


> As is can't be reproduced with X86_64 build, it could be i386
> compiling related.

Your particular config causes a huge amount of nasty 64-bit arithmetic
according to the objdump code, with sequences like

  c13b3cbb:       83 05 d0 28 6c c5 01    addl   $0x1,0xc56c28d0
  c13b3cc2:       83 15 d4 28 6c c5 00    adcl   $0x0,0xc56c28d4

which seems to be just from some coverage profiling being on
(CONFIG_GCOV?), or something. It makes it very hard to read the code.

You also have UBSAN enabled, which - again - makes for some really
grotty asm that hides any actual logic.

Finally, your objdump version also does some horrendous decoding, like

  c13b3e29:       8d b4 26 00 00 00 00    lea    0x0(%esi,%eiz,1),%esi

which is just a 7-byte 'nop' instruction, but again, it makes it
rather hard to actually read the code.

With the i386 defconfig, gcc generates a function that is just ~30
instructions for me, so this makes a huge difference in the legibility
of the code.

I wonder if you can recreate the issue with a much more
straightforward config. By all means, leave DEBUG_PAGEALLOC and SLUB
debugging on, but without the things like UBSAN and GCOV.

> I also objdumped 'prep_compound_page' for vmlinux of 7118fc2906 and
> its parent commit 48b8d744ea84, which have big difference than the
> simple 'set_page_count()' change, but I can't tell which part is
> abnormal, so attach them for further check.

Yeah, I can't make heads or tails of them either, see above on how
illegible the objdump files are. And that's despite not even having
all of prep_compound_page() in them (it's missing
prep_compound_page.cold, which is probably just UBSAN fixup code, but
who knows..)

That said, with the i386 defconfig, the only change from adding
set_page_count() to the loop seems to be exactly that:

 .L589:
-       movl    $1024, 12(%eax)
+       movl    $0, 28(%eax)
        addl    $32, %eax
+       movl    $1024, -20(%eax)
        movl    %esi, -28(%eax)
        movl    $0, -12(%eax)
        cmpl    %edx, %eax

(don't ask me why gcc does *one* access using the pre-incremented
pointer, and then the rest to the post-incremented ones, but whatever
- it means that it's not just "add a mov $0", it's also changing how
the

        p->mapping = TAIL_MAPPING;

instruction is done, which is that

-       movl    $1024, 12(%eax)
+       movl    $1024, -20(%eax)

part of the change)

             Linus


  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-17 18:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-17  7:10 kernel test robot
2023-01-17  7:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-17  7:47   ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-01-17  8:01   ` Feng Tang
2023-01-17 12:20     ` Feng Tang
2023-01-17 18:25       ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2023-01-18  1:07         ` Feng Tang
2023-01-18 13:31         ` Feng Tang
2023-01-18 17:10           ` Linus Torvalds
2023-01-19  2:19             ` Feng Tang
2023-01-18 13:35         ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-18 15:07           ` Feng Tang
2023-01-17 18:50 ` 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='CAHk-=wiS84nS9apjs_Vt=jjZ_+j+F8HQ3B+ABSvbzcqtW9x5Kg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
    --cc=hongjiu.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=youquan.song@intel.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