lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 10/22] HWPOISON: check and isolate corrupted free pages v2
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:16:20 +0800
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 05:41:12PM +0800, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:45:30 +0800
> > Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > >
> > > If memory corruption hits the free buddy pages, we can safely ignore them.
> > > No one will access them until page allocation time, then prep_new_page()
> > > will automatically check and isolate PG_hwpoison page for us (for 0-order
> > > allocation).
> > >
> > > This patch expands prep_new_page() to check every component page in a high
> > > order page allocation, in order to completely stop PG_hwpoison pages from
> > > being recirculated.
> > >
> > > Note that the common case -- only allocating a single page, doesn't
> > > do any more work than before. Allocating > order 0 does a bit more work,
> > > but that's relatively uncommon.
> > >
> > > This simple implementation may drop some innocent neighbor pages, hopefully
> > > it is not a big problem because the event should be rare enough.
> > >
> > > This patch adds some runtime costs to high order page users.
> > >
> > > [AK: Improved description]
> > >
> > > v2: Andi Kleen:
> > > Port to -mm code
> > > Move check into separate function.
> > > Don't dump stack in bad_pages for hwpoisoned pages.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > mm/page_alloc.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > --- sound-2.6.orig/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > +++ sound-2.6/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > @@ -233,6 +233,12 @@ static void bad_page(struct page *page)
> > > static unsigned long nr_shown;
> > > static unsigned long nr_unshown;
> > >
> > > + /* Don't complain about poisoned pages */
> > > + if (PageHWPoison(page)) {
> > > + __ClearPageBuddy(page);
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> >
> > Hmm ? why __ClearPageBuddy() is necessary ?
>
> Because this page is considered to be "allocated" out of the buddy
> system, even though we fail the allocation here.
>
> The page is now owned by no one, especially not owned by the buddy
> allocator.
>
I just wonder "why __ClearPageBuddy() is necessary."

When bad_page() is called, a page is removed from buddy allocator and no
PG_buddy flag at all....I'm sorry if you added bad_page() caller in buddy allocator.
Buddy Allocator I call here is just 2 functions.
- __free_one_page()
- expand()


Bye,
-Kame



> Thanks,
> Fengguang
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-16 01:57    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site