From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
elver@google.com, dvyukov@google.com, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
Aleksandr Nogikh <nogikh@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memblock: Correct totalram_pages accounting with KMSAN
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 17:50:53 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aNVWzaxq82UI3wWO@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250925123759.59479-1-sj@kernel.org>
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 05:37:59AM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 12:03:01 +0200 Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com> wrote:
>
> > When KMSAN is enabled, `kmsan_memblock_free_pages()` can hold back pages
> > for metadata instead of returning them to the early allocator. The callers,
> > however, would unconditionally increment `totalram_pages`, assuming the
> > pages were always freed. This resulted in an incorrect calculation of the
> > total available RAM, causing the kernel to believe it had more memory than
> > it actually did.
> >
> > This patch refactors `memblock_free_pages()` to return the number of pages
> > it successfully frees. If KMSAN stashes the pages, the function now
> > returns 0; otherwise, it returns the number of pages in the block.
> >
> > The callers in `memblock.c` have been updated to use this return value,
> > ensuring that `totalram_pages` is incremented only by the number of pages
> > actually returned to the allocator. This corrects the total RAM accounting
> > when KMSAN is active.
> >
> > Cc: Aleksandr Nogikh <nogikh@google.com>
> > Fixes: 3c2065098260 ("init: kmsan: call KMSAN initialization routines")
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
> > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> [...]
> > --- a/mm/mm_init.c
> > +++ b/mm/mm_init.c
> > @@ -2548,24 +2548,25 @@ void *__init alloc_large_system_hash(const char *tablename,
> > return table;
> > }
> >
> > -void __init memblock_free_pages(struct page *page, unsigned long pfn,
> > - unsigned int order)
> > +unsigned long __init memblock_free_pages(struct page *page, unsigned long pfn,
> > + unsigned int order)
> > {
> > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT)) {
> > int nid = early_pfn_to_nid(pfn);
> >
> > if (!early_page_initialised(pfn, nid))
> > - return;
> > + return 0;
> > }
>
> I found this patch on mm-new tree is making my test machine (QEMU) reports much
> less MemTotal even though KMSAN is disabled. And modifying the above part to
> be considered as free success (returning '1UL << order') fixed my issue.
> Because the commit message says the purpose of this change is only for
> KMSAN-stashed memory, maybe the above behavior change is not really intended?
>
> I'm not familiar with this code so I'm unsure if the workaround is the right
> fix. But since I have no time to look this in deep for now, reporting first
With DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT we count totalram_pages in
memblock_free_all() but actually free them in deferred_init_memmap() and
deferred_grow_zone().
So returning '1UL << order' is a correct workaround, but the proper fix
should update totalram_pages in the deferred path IMHO.
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-25 14:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-24 10:03 Alexander Potapenko
2025-09-24 13:07 ` Markus Elfring
2025-09-24 13:23 ` Markus Elfring
2025-09-24 13:34 ` Marco Elver
2025-09-25 5:25 ` Mike Rapoport
2025-09-25 12:37 ` SeongJae Park
2025-09-25 12:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-09-25 14:50 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2025-09-26 0:25 ` Wei Yang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-09-24 9:56 Alexander Potapenko
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=aNVWzaxq82UI3wWO@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nogikh@google.com \
--cc=sj@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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