From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: amusing SLUB compaction bug when CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 16:57:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a80932ef-d029-c82e-d171-ab8bdac8cbdc@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7dddca4c-bc36-2cf0-de1c-a770bef9e1b7@suse.cz>
On 10/24/22 16:35, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 10/3/22 19:00, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 02, 2022 at 02:48:02PM +0900, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
>>> Just one more thing, rcu_leak_callback too. RCU seem to use it
>>> internally to catch double call_rcu().
>>>
>>> And some suggestions:
>>> - what about adding runtime WARN() on slab init code to catch
>>> unexpected arch/toolchain issues?
>>> - instead of 4, we may use macro definition? like (PAGE_MAPPING_FLAGS + 1)?
>>
>> I think the real problem here is that isolate_movable_page() is
>> insufficiently paranoid. Looking at the gyrations that GUP and the
>> page cache do to convince themselves that the page they got really is
>> the page they wanted, there are a few missing pieces (eg checking that
>> you actually got a refcount on _this_ page and not some random other
>> page you were temporarily part of a compound page with).
>>
>> This patch does three things:
>>
>> - Turns one of the comments into English. There are some others
>> which I'm still scratching my head over.
>> - Uses a folio to help distinguish which operations are being done
>> to the head vs the specific page (this is somewhat an abuse of the
>> folio concept, but it's acceptable)
>> - Add the aforementioned check that we're actually operating on the
>> page that we think we want to be.
>> - Add a check that the folio isn't secretly a slab.
>>
>> We could put the slab check in PageMapping and call it after taking
>> the folio lock, but that seems pointless. It's the acquisition of
>> the refcount which stabilises the slab flag, not holding the lock.
>>
>
> I would like to have a working safe version in -next, even if we are able
> simplify it later thanks to frozen refcounts. I've made a formal patch of
> yours, but I'm still convinced the slab check needs to be more paranoid so
> it can't observe a false positive __folio_test_movable() while missing the
> folio_test_slab(), hence I added the barriers as in my previous attempt [1].
> Does that work for you and can I add your S-o-b?
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/aec59f53-0e53-1736-5932-25407125d4d4@suse.cz/
To move on, I pushed a branch based on a new version of [1] above. It
lacks Matthew's folio parts, which are not IMHO that critical right now,
so can be added later.
It's here:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vbabka/slab.git/log/?h=slab/for-6.2/fit_rcu_head
Will also send for formal review soon.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-04 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-28 5:16 Hugh Dickins
2022-09-28 5:49 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-09-28 13:48 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-28 15:09 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-09-28 16:20 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-28 17:50 ` Hugh Dickins
2022-09-29 9:58 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-29 21:54 ` Hugh Dickins
2022-09-30 7:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-30 10:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2022-09-30 11:02 ` David Laight
2022-09-30 16:21 ` Hugh Dickins
2022-09-30 21:34 ` David Laight
2022-10-02 5:48 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-10-03 17:00 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-04 14:26 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-10-04 14:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-05 11:07 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-10-24 14:35 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-24 15:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-24 15:24 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-24 16:49 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-25 4:19 ` Hugh Dickins
2022-10-25 9:17 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-25 15:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2022-10-25 13:47 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-10-25 14:08 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-26 10:52 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-26 12:29 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-11-04 15:57 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2022-09-29 11:53 ` David Laight
2022-09-29 13:01 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-29 14:04 ` David Laight
2022-09-28 17:56 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-09-28 19:53 ` Joel Fernandes
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=a80932ef-d029-c82e-d171-ab8bdac8cbdc@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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