lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Aug]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] mm, dump_page: do not crash with bad compound_mapcount()
    On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 06:15:00PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
    > On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 05:53:10PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
    > > On 8/6/20 5:39 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
    > > >> >> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
    > > >> >> @@ -2125,7 +2125,7 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
    > > >> >> * Set PG_double_map before dropping compound_mapcount to avoid
    > > >> >> * false-negative page_mapped().
    > > >> >> */
    > > >> >> - if (compound_mapcount(page) > 1 && !TestSetPageDoubleMap(page)) {
    > > >> >> + if (head_mapcount(page) > 1 && !TestSetPageDoubleMap(page)) {
    > > >> >
    > > >> > I'm a little nervous about this one. The page does actually come from
    > > >> > pmd_page(), and today that's guaranteed to be a head page. But I'm
    > > >> > not convinced that's going to still be true in twenty years. With the
    > > >> > current THP patchset, I won't allocate pages larger than PMD order, but
    > > >> > I can see there being interest in tracking pages in chunks larger than
    > > >> > 2MB in the future. And then pmd_page() might well return a tail page.
    > > >> > So it might be a good idea to not convert this one.
    > > >>
    > > >> Hmm the function converts the compound mapcount of the whole page to a
    > > >> HPAGE_PMD_NR of base pages. If suddenly the compound page was bigger than a pmd,
    > > >> then I guess this wouldn't work properly anymore without changes anyway?
    > > >> Maybe we could stick something like VM_BUG_ON(PageTransHuge(page)) there as
    > > >> "enforced documentation" for now?
    > > >
    > > > I think it would work as-is. But also I may have totally misunderstood it.
    > > > I'll write this declaratively and specifically for x86 (PMD order is 9)
    > > > ... tell me when I've made a mistake ;-)
    > > >
    > > > This function is for splitting the PMD. We're leaving the underlying
    > > > page intact and just changing the page table. So if, say, we have an
    > > > underlying 4MB page (and maybe the pages are mapped as PMDs in this
    > > > process), we might get subpage number 512 of this order-10 page. We'd
    > > > need to check the DoubleMap bit on subpage 1, and the compound_mapcount
    > > > also stored in page 1, but we'd only want to spread the mapcount out
    > > > over the 512 subpages from 512-1023; we wouldn't want to spread it out
    > > > over 0-511 because they aren't affected by this particular PMD.
    > >
    > > Yeah, and then we decrease the compound mapcount, which is a counter of "how
    > > many times is this compound page mapped as a whole". But we only removed (the
    > > second) half of the compound mapping, so imho that would be wrong?
    >
    > I'd expect that count to be incremented by 1 for each PMD that it's
    > mapped to? ie change the definition of that counter slightly.
    >
    > > > Having to reason about stuff like this is why I limited the THP code to
    > > > stop at PMD order ... I don't want to make my life even more complicated
    > > > than I have to!
    > >
    > > Kirill might correct me but I'd expect the THP code right now has baked in many
    > > assumptions about THP pages being exactly HPAGE_PMD_ORDER large?

    That will be true for PMD-mapped THP pages after applying Matthew's
    patchset.

    > There are somewhat fewer places that make that assumption after applying
    > the ~80 patches here ... http://git.infradead.org/users/willy/pagecache.git

    The patchset allows for THP to be anywhere between order-2 and
    order-9 (on x86-64).

    > I have mostly not touched the anonymous THPs (obviously some of the code
    > paths are shared), although both Kirill & I think there's a win to be
    > had there too.

    Yeah. Reducing LRU handling overhead alone should be enough to justify the
    effort. But we still would need to have numbers.

    --
    Kirill A. Shutemov

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-08-07 16:54    [W:2.393 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site