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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74B00C433F5 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 03:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FDF96140B for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 03:08:43 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 1FDF96140B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3257D900002; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 23:08:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 2D4716B0071; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 23:08:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 19B81900002; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 23:08:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0117.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.117]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09A1A6B006C for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 23:08:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin25.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0450348D5 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 03:08:41 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78660901242.25.42EEBA8 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 418AC7001729 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 03:08:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=7dBLIl+nvuJ5/TshWkFH8R/LSyf8rCwOu4+qy+UdpKk=; b=OXiiUkcKKK02LNPNBKm308CqZl zn9XIlWG9x/zvF5x//XHHfl1P4EMHc3+d0kdlhmpbSADx523b5P/6myMusopE5FdU5SMx3cIZAPSs Um+djmUoxsEvNHMGRUrg9eALb6XiA9kL2JlaLd5SEe2yp4A+wJsuYVE2boLmQAJf2D6Imuj6NnSiN 9TigofdnDDLNCnV6WjPIxcfsICV9VvjxqZlfhX9fyZ7hX4MV49+4ZOd/jSpgTcmwh30oZmc+AeBH9 8XxdHcrgwIzVnyVRhJQ9KBMZWaf5gNYnxgbapnZtYUzYX5wHKT8rCQ6O1NNNMa8NxOXGTd3fBKR6c hxpYIPtg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mXanr-00HYe2-Rd; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 03:07:45 +0000 Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 04:07:39 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Rongwei Wang , Song Liu , Andrew Morton , Linux MM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , William Kucharski Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm, thp: check page mapping when truncating page cache Message-ID: References: <68737431-01d2-e6e3-5131-7d7c731e49ae@linux.alibaba.com> <8d8fb192-bd8d-8a08-498d-ca7204d4a716@linux.alibaba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 418AC7001729 X-Stat-Signature: a5hzqjbykj5c3k543bqs4bwxfdtd8841 Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=OXiiUkcK; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org X-HE-Tag: 1633403321-645997 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 Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 07:58:10PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Tue, 5 Oct 2021, Rongwei Wang wrote: > > > Hi, > > I have run our cases these two days to stress test new Patch #1. The new Patch > > #1 mainly add filemap_invalidate_{un}lock before and after > > truncate_pagecache(), basing on original Patch #1. And the crash has not > > happened. > > > > Now, I keep the original Patch #1, then adding the code below which suggested > > by liu song (I'm not sure which one I should add in the next version, > > Suggested-by or Signed-off-by? If you know, please remind me). > > > > - if (filemap_nr_thps(inode->i_mapping)) > > + if (filemap_nr_thps(inode->i_mapping)) { > > + filemap_invalidate_lock(inode->i_mapping); > > truncate_pagecache(inode, 0); > > + filemap_invalidate_unlock(inode->i_mapping); > > + } > > I won't NAK that patch; but I still believe it's unnecessary, and don't > see how it protects against all the races (collapse_file() does not use > that lock, whereas collapse_file() does use page lock). And if you're > hoping to fix 5.10, then you will have to backport those invalidate_lock > patches there too (they're really intended to protect hole-punching). I believe all we really need to do is protect against calling truncate_pagecache() simultaneously to avoid one of the calls seeing a tail page. i_mutex would work for this purpose just as well as filemap_invalidate_lock(). See, for example, ext4_zero_range() which first takes inode_lock(), then filemap_invalidate_lock() before calling truncate_pagecache_range(). > > And the reason for keeping the original Patch #1 is mainly to fix the race > > between collapse_file and truncate_pagecache. It seems necessary. Despite the > > two-day test, I did not reproduce this race any more. > > > > In addition, I also test the below method: > > > > diff --git a/mm/truncate.c b/mm/truncate.c > > index 3f47190f98a8..33604e4ce60a 100644 > > --- a/mm/truncate.c > > +++ b/mm/truncate.c > > @@ -210,8 +210,6 @@ invalidate_complete_page(struct address_space *mapping, > > struct page *page) > > > > int truncate_inode_page(struct address_space *mapping, struct page *page) > > { > > - VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTail(page), page); > > - > > if (page->mapping != mapping) > > return -EIO; > > > > I am not very sure this VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTail) is what Hugh means. And > > the test results show that only removing this VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTail) has no > > effect. So, I still keep the original Patch #1 to fix one race. > > Yes, that's exactly what I meant, and thank you for intending to try it. > > But if that patch had "no effect", then I think you were not running the > kernel with that patch applied: because it deletes the BUG on line 213 > of mm/truncate.c, which is what you reported in the first mail! > > Or, is line 213 of mm/truncate.c in your 5.10.46-hugetext+ kernel > something else? I've been looking at 5.15-rc. > > But I wasn't proposing to delete it merely to hide the BUG: as I hope > I explained, we could move it below the page->mapping check, but it > wouldn't really be of any value there since tails have NULL page->mapping > anyway (well, I didn't check first and second tails, maybe mapping gets > reused for some compound page field in those). I was proposing to delete > it because the page->mapping check then weeds out the racy case once > we're holding page lock, without the need for adding anything special. I think if we remove the race with the above mutex lock then we'll never see a tail page in this routine.