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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FAAFC4360F for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:51:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E00217F5 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:51:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2403833AbfBRRvR (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:51:17 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:35612 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733043AbfBRRvQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:51:16 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098416.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x1IHp7fR129095 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:51:15 -0500 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2qqxrf0u3f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:51:12 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:48:38 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.197) by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.137) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:48:34 -0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (mk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x1IHmX9R24838356 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:48:33 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FF9E42042; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:48:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F0C42047; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:48:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rapoport-lnx (unknown [9.148.207.239]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:48:31 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 19:48:29 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: Michal Hocko Cc: Rong Chen , Pavel Tatashin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Memory Management List , Andrew Morton , LKP , Oscar Salvador Subject: Re: [LKP] efad4e475c [ 40.308255] Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI References: <20190218052823.GH29177@shao2-debian> <20190218070844.GC4525@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190218085510.GC7251@dhcp22.suse.cz> <4c75d424-2c51-0d7d-5c28-78c15600e93c@intel.com> <20190218103013.GK4525@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190218140515.GF25446@rapoport-lnx> <20190218152050.GS4525@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190218152213.GT4525@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190218164813.GG25446@rapoport-lnx> <20190218170558.GV4525@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190218170558.GV4525@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19021817-0028-0000-0000-00000349FEEB X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19021817-0029-0000-0000-0000240837F9 Message-Id: <20190218174828.GH25446@rapoport-lnx> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-02-18_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1902180132 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 06:05:58PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 18-02-19 18:48:14, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 04:22:13PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] > > > Thinking about it some more, is it possible that we are overflowing by 1 > > > here? > > > > Looks like that, the end_pfn is actually the first pfn in the next section. > > Thanks for the confirmation. I guess it also exaplains why nobody has > noticed this off-by-one. Most people seem to use VMEMMAP SPARSE model > and we are safe there. > > > > diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > > index 124e794867c5..6618b9d3e53a 100644 > > > --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > > +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > > @@ -1234,10 +1234,10 @@ bool is_mem_section_removable(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages) > > > { > > > struct page *page = pfn_to_page(start_pfn); > > > unsigned long end_pfn = min(start_pfn + nr_pages, zone_end_pfn(page_zone(page))); > > > - struct page *end_page = pfn_to_page(end_pfn); > > > + struct page *end_page = pfn_to_page(end_pfn - 1); > > > > > > /* Check the starting page of each pageblock within the range */ > > > - for (; page < end_page; page = next_active_pageblock(page)) { > > > + for (; page <= end_page; page = next_active_pageblock(page)) { > > > if (!is_pageblock_removable_nolock(page)) > > > return false; > > > cond_resched(); > > > > Works with your fix, but I think mine is more intuitive ;-) > > I would rather go and rework this to pfns. What about this instead. > Slightly larger but arguably cleared code? Yeah, this is clearer. > diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > index 124e794867c5..a799a0bdbf34 100644 > --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c > +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > @@ -1188,11 +1188,13 @@ static inline int pageblock_free(struct page *page) > return PageBuddy(page) && page_order(page) >= pageblock_order; > } > > -/* Return the start of the next active pageblock after a given page */ > -static struct page *next_active_pageblock(struct page *page) > +/* Return the pfn of the start of the next active pageblock after a given pfn */ > +static unsigned long next_active_pageblock(unsigned long pfn) > { > + struct page *page = pfn_to_page(pfn); > + > /* Ensure the starting page is pageblock-aligned */ > - BUG_ON(page_to_pfn(page) & (pageblock_nr_pages - 1)); > + BUG_ON(pfn & (pageblock_nr_pages - 1)); > > /* If the entire pageblock is free, move to the end of free page */ > if (pageblock_free(page)) { > @@ -1200,16 +1202,16 @@ static struct page *next_active_pageblock(struct page *page) > /* be careful. we don't have locks, page_order can be changed.*/ > order = page_order(page); > if ((order < MAX_ORDER) && (order >= pageblock_order)) > - return page + (1 << order); > + return pfn + (1 << order); > } > > - return page + pageblock_nr_pages; > + return pfn + pageblock_nr_pages; > } > > -static bool is_pageblock_removable_nolock(struct page *page) > +static bool is_pageblock_removable_nolock(unsigned long pfn) > { > + struct page *page = pfn_to_page(pfn); > struct zone *zone; > - unsigned long pfn; > > /* > * We have to be careful here because we are iterating over memory > @@ -1232,13 +1234,14 @@ static bool is_pageblock_removable_nolock(struct page *page) > /* Checks if this range of memory is likely to be hot-removable. */ > bool is_mem_section_removable(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages) > { > - struct page *page = pfn_to_page(start_pfn); > - unsigned long end_pfn = min(start_pfn + nr_pages, zone_end_pfn(page_zone(page))); > - struct page *end_page = pfn_to_page(end_pfn); > + unsigned long end_pfn; > + > + end_pfn = min(start_pfn + nr_pages, > + zone_end_pfn(page_zone(pfn_to_page(start_pfn)))); > > /* Check the starting page of each pageblock within the range */ > - for (; page < end_page; page = next_active_pageblock(page)) { > - if (!is_pageblock_removable_nolock(page)) > + for (; start_pfn < end_pfn; start_pfn = next_active_pageblock(start_pfn)) { > + if (!is_pageblock_removable_nolock(start_pfn)) > return false; > cond_resched(); > } With this on top the loop even fits into 80-chars ;-) diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c index 9cc42f3..9981ca7 100644 --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c @@ -1234,13 +1234,13 @@ static bool is_pageblock_removable_nolock(unsigned long pfn) /* Checks if this range of memory is likely to be hot-removable. */ bool is_mem_section_removable(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages) { - unsigned long end_pfn; + unsigned long end_pfn, pfn; end_pfn = min(start_pfn + nr_pages, zone_end_pfn(page_zone(pfn_to_page(start_pfn)))); /* Check the starting page of each pageblock within the range */ - for (; start_pfn < end_pfn; start_pfn = next_active_pageblock(start_pfn)) { + for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn < end_pfn; pfn = next_active_pageblock(pfn)) { if (!is_pageblock_removable_nolock(start_pfn)) return false; cond_resched(); -- Sincerely yours, Mike.