* [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure()
@ 2022-04-12 15:11 Xu Yu
2022-04-12 20:01 ` Andrew Morton
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Xu Yu @ 2022-04-12 15:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mm; +Cc: naoya.horiguchi, akpm, linmiaohe, osalvador
Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page,
when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows.
[ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000
[ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00
[ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0
[ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff)
[ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000
[ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000
[ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head))
[ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499!
[ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI
[ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11
[ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014
[ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880
[ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b
[ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000
[ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff
[ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff
[ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000
[ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40
[ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0
[ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 5.604806] Call Trace:
[ 5.605101] <TASK>
[ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70
[ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130
[ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800
[ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1
[ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60
[ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80
[ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9
[ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8
[ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c
[ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9
[ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000
[ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
[ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490
[ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
[ 5.616626] </TASK>
This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in
memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again.
Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com>
Suggested-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com>
---
mm/memory-failure.c | 13 +++++++++++++
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
index dcb6bb9cf731..8788ea49bd28 100644
--- a/mm/memory-failure.c
+++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
@@ -1799,6 +1799,19 @@ int memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int flags)
}
if (PageTransHuge(hpage)) {
+ /*
+ * Bail out before SetPageHasHWPoisoned() if hpage is
+ * huge_zero_page, although PG_has_hwpoisoned is not
+ * checked in set_huge_zero_page().
+ *
+ * TODO: Handle memory failure of huge_zero_page thoroughly.
+ */
+ if (is_huge_zero_page(hpage)) {
+ action_result(pfn, MF_MSG_UNSPLIT_THP, MF_IGNORED);
+ res = -EBUSY;
+ goto unlock_mutex;
+ }
+
/*
* The flag must be set after the refcount is bumped
* otherwise it may race with THP split.
--
2.20.1.2432.ga663e714
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-12 15:11 [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() Xu Yu @ 2022-04-12 20:01 ` Andrew Morton 2022-04-15 6:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-20 23:38 ` Yang Shi ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2022-04-12 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu Yu; +Cc: linux-mm, naoya.horiguchi, linmiaohe, osalvador On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 23:11:01 +0800 Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > > ... > > > Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com> > Suggested-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > Signed-off-by: Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> Thanks, I added a cc:stable to this. If anyone could suggest a suitable Fixes:, that would help the -stable people. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-12 20:01 ` Andrew Morton @ 2022-04-15 6:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-16 1:47 ` Miaohe Lin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-04-15 6:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: Xu Yu, linux-mm, linmiaohe, osalvador On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 01:01:02PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 23:11:01 +0800 Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > > Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > > when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > > > > ... > > > > > > Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com> > > Suggested-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > > Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > > Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > > Signed-off-by: Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> Thank you for the patch. Acked-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > > Thanks, I added a cc:stable to this. > > If anyone could suggest a suitable Fixes:, that would help the -stable > people. The problem was existing from the origin of memory_failure, so the following Fixes: tag looks fine to me. Fixes: 6a46079cf57a ("HWPOISON: The high level memory error handler in the VM v7") Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-15 6:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-04-16 1:47 ` Miaohe Lin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Miaohe Lin @ 2022-04-16 1:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton Cc: Xu Yu, linux-mm, osalvador On 2022/4/15 14:16, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 01:01:02PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 23:11:01 +0800 Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >> >>> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, >>> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. >>> >>> ... >>> >>> >>> Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com> >>> Suggested-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> >>> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> >>> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> >>> Signed-off-by: Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> LGTM. Thanks. Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > > Thank you for the patch. > > Acked-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > >> >> Thanks, I added a cc:stable to this. >> >> If anyone could suggest a suitable Fixes:, that would help the -stable >> people. > > The problem was existing from the origin of memory_failure, so the following > Fixes: tag looks fine to me. > > Fixes: 6a46079cf57a ("HWPOISON: The high level memory error handler in the VM v7") Thanks for your Fixes tag. But huge zero page is not even introduced in that commit. So maybe Fixes: 4a6c1297268c ("thp: huge zero page: basic preparation") which introduced huge zero page will be more suitable? Thanks! > > Thanks, > Naoya Horiguchi > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-12 15:11 [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() Xu Yu 2022-04-12 20:01 ` Andrew Morton @ 2022-04-20 23:38 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-21 9:03 ` David Hildenbrand 2022-04-21 11:15 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-23 3:16 ` Yu Xu 3 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Yang Shi @ 2022-04-20 23:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu Yu Cc: Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > > [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 > [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 > [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 > [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) > [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 > [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) > [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! > [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 > [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 > [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 > [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b > [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 > [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff > [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff > [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 > [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 > [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 > [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > [ 5.604806] Call Trace: > [ 5.605101] <TASK> > [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 > [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 > [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 > [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 > [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 > [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 > [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 > [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 > [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c > [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 > [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 > [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 > [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.616626] </TASK> > > This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in > memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. > > Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com> > Suggested-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > Signed-off-by: Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > mm/memory-failure.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c > index dcb6bb9cf731..8788ea49bd28 100644 > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c > @@ -1799,6 +1799,19 @@ int memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int flags) > } > > if (PageTransHuge(hpage)) { > + /* > + * Bail out before SetPageHasHWPoisoned() if hpage is > + * huge_zero_page, although PG_has_hwpoisoned is not > + * checked in set_huge_zero_page(). > + * > + * TODO: Handle memory failure of huge_zero_page thoroughly. > + */ > + if (is_huge_zero_page(hpage)) { > + action_result(pfn, MF_MSG_UNSPLIT_THP, MF_IGNORED); > + res = -EBUSY; > + goto unlock_mutex; > + } > + > /* > * The flag must be set after the refcount is bumped > * otherwise it may race with THP split. > -- > 2.20.1.2432.ga663e714 > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-20 23:38 ` Yang Shi @ 2022-04-21 9:03 ` David Hildenbrand 2022-04-21 11:18 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-21 17:53 ` Yang Shi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: David Hildenbrand @ 2022-04-21 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yang Shi, Xu Yu Cc: Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >> >> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, >> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. >> >> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 >> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 >> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 >> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) >> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 >> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 >> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) >> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! >> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI >> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 >> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 >> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 >> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b >> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 >> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 >> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff >> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff >> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 >> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 >> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 >> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 >> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 >> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 >> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: >> [ 5.605101] <TASK> >> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 >> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 >> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 >> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 >> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 >> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 >> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae >> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 >> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 >> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c >> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 >> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 >> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 >> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 >> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 >> [ 5.616626] </TASK> >> >> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in >> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. > > Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm > actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting > huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-21 9:03 ` David Hildenbrand @ 2022-04-21 11:18 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-21 17:53 ` Yang Shi 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Anshuman Khandual @ 2022-04-21 11:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Hildenbrand, Yang Shi, Xu Yu Cc: Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On 4/21/22 14:33, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >>> >>> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, >>> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. >>> >>> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 >>> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 >>> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 >>> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) >>> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 >>> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 >>> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) >>> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! >>> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI >>> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 >>> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 >>> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 >>> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b >>> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 >>> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 >>> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff >>> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff >>> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 >>> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 >>> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 >>> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >>> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 >>> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 >>> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 >>> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: >>> [ 5.605101] <TASK> >>> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 >>> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 >>> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 >>> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 >>> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 >>> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 >>> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae >>> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 >>> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 >>> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c >>> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 >>> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 >>> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 >>> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 >>> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 >>> [ 5.616626] </TASK> >>> >>> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in >>> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. >> >> Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm >> actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting >> huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. > > I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most > probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we > don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. Agreed, and hence MF_MSG_UNSPLIT_THP as a reason code might not be optimal. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-21 9:03 ` David Hildenbrand 2022-04-21 11:18 ` Anshuman Khandual @ 2022-04-21 17:53 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-22 1:00 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-22 3:27 ` Yu Xu 1 sibling, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Yang Shi @ 2022-04-21 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Hildenbrand Cc: Xu Yu, Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 2:03 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > >> > >> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > >> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > >> > >> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 > >> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 > >> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 > >> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) > >> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > >> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 > >> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) > >> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > >> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! > >> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > >> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 > >> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 > >> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 > >> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b > >> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 > >> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 > >> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff > >> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff > >> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 > >> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 > >> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > >> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > >> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 > >> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > >> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > >> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: > >> [ 5.605101] <TASK> > >> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 > >> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 > >> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 > >> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 > >> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 > >> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 > >> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > >> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 > >> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 > >> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c > >> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 > >> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 > >> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > >> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 > >> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 > >> [ 5.616626] </TASK> > >> > >> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in > >> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. > > > > Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm > > actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting > > huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. > > I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most > probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we > don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. Yeah, the huge zero page can't be met from normal paths other than memory failure, but memory failure is a valid caller. So I tend to replace the BUG to WARN + returning -EBUSY. If we don't care about the reason code in memory failure, we don't have to touch memory failure. > > -- > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-21 17:53 ` Yang Shi @ 2022-04-22 1:00 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-22 3:27 ` Yu Xu 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-04-22 1:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yang Shi Cc: David Hildenbrand, Xu Yu, Linux MM, Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:53:43AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 2:03 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > > >> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > > >> > > >> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 > > >> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 > > >> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 > > >> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) > > >> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > > >> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 > > >> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) > > >> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > >> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! > > >> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > > >> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 > > >> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 > > >> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 > > >> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b > > >> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 > > >> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 > > >> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff > > >> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff > > >> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 > > >> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 > > >> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > > >> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > > >> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 > > >> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > > >> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > > >> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: > > >> [ 5.605101] <TASK> > > >> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 > > >> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 > > >> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 > > >> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 > > >> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 > > >> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 > > >> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > > >> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 > > >> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 > > >> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c > > >> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 > > >> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 > > >> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > > >> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 > > >> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 > > >> [ 5.616626] </TASK> > > >> > > >> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in > > >> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. > > > > > > Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm > > > actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting > > > huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. > > > > I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most > > probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we > > don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. > > Yeah, the huge zero page can't be met from normal paths other than > memory failure, but memory failure is a valid caller. So I tend to > replace the BUG to WARN + returning -EBUSY. If we don't care about the > reason code in memory failure, we don't have to touch memory failure. I agree with returning -EBUSY when splitting huge zero page, too. Thank you for the suggestion. - Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-21 17:53 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-22 1:00 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-04-22 3:27 ` Yu Xu 2022-04-22 16:03 ` Yang Shi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Yu Xu @ 2022-04-22 3:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yang Shi, David Hildenbrand Cc: Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On 4/22/22 1:53 AM, Yang Shi wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 2:03 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, >>>> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. >>>> >>>> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 >>>> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 >>>> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 >>>> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) >>>> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 >>>> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 >>>> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) >>>> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>>> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! >>>> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI >>>> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 >>>> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 >>>> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 >>>> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b >>>> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 >>>> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 >>>> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff >>>> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff >>>> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 >>>> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 >>>> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 >>>> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >>>> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 >>>> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 >>>> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 >>>> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: >>>> [ 5.605101] <TASK> >>>> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 >>>> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 >>>> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 >>>> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 >>>> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 >>>> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 >>>> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae >>>> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 >>>> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 >>>> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c >>>> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 >>>> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 >>>> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 >>>> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 >>>> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 >>>> [ 5.616626] </TASK> >>>> >>>> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in >>>> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. >>> >>> Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm >>> actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting >>> huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. >> >> I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most >> probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we >> don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. > > Yeah, the huge zero page can't be met from normal paths other than > memory failure, but memory failure is a valid caller. So I tend to > replace the BUG to WARN + returning -EBUSY. If we don't care about the > reason code in memory failure, we don't have to touch memory failure. To make sure I understand this correctly, do you mean the following? diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c index c468fee595ff..3bb464509518 100644 --- a/mm/huge_memory.c +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c @@ -2496,10 +2496,12 @@ int split_huge_page_to_list(struct page *page, struct list_head *list) int extra_pins, ret; pgoff_t end; - VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head); VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(head), head); VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageCompound(head), head); + if (VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head)) + return -EBUSY; + if (PageWriteback(head)) return -EBUSY; > >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> >> David / dhildenb >> >> -- Thanks, Yu ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-22 3:27 ` Yu Xu @ 2022-04-22 16:03 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-22 17:37 ` Yu Xu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Yang Shi @ 2022-04-22 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yu Xu Cc: David Hildenbrand, Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 8:27 PM Yu Xu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > On 4/22/22 1:53 AM, Yang Shi wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 2:03 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: > >>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > >>>> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > >>>> > >>>> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 > >>>> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 > >>>> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 > >>>> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) > >>>> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > >>>> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 > >>>> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) > >>>> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > >>>> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! > >>>> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > >>>> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 > >>>> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 > >>>> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 > >>>> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b > >>>> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 > >>>> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 > >>>> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff > >>>> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff > >>>> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 > >>>> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 > >>>> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > >>>> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > >>>> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 > >>>> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > >>>> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > >>>> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: > >>>> [ 5.605101] <TASK> > >>>> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 > >>>> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 > >>>> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 > >>>> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 > >>>> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 > >>>> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 > >>>> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > >>>> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 > >>>> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 > >>>> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c > >>>> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 > >>>> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 > >>>> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > >>>> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 > >>>> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 > >>>> [ 5.616626] </TASK> > >>>> > >>>> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in > >>>> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. > >>> > >>> Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm > >>> actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting > >>> huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. > >> > >> I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most > >> probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we > >> don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. > > > > Yeah, the huge zero page can't be met from normal paths other than > > memory failure, but memory failure is a valid caller. So I tend to > > replace the BUG to WARN + returning -EBUSY. If we don't care about the > > reason code in memory failure, we don't have to touch memory failure. > > To make sure I understand this correctly, do you mean the following? Yes. And you should be able to drop your old patch as well. > > diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c > index c468fee595ff..3bb464509518 100644 > --- a/mm/huge_memory.c > +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c > @@ -2496,10 +2496,12 @@ int split_huge_page_to_list(struct page *page, struct > list_head *list) > int extra_pins, ret; > pgoff_t end; > > - VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head); > VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(head), head); > VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageCompound(head), head); > > + if (VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head)) > + return -EBUSY; > + > if (PageWriteback(head)) > return -EBUSY; > > > > > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks, > >> > >> David / dhildenb > >> > >> > > -- > Thanks, > Yu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-22 16:03 ` Yang Shi @ 2022-04-22 17:37 ` Yu Xu 2022-04-22 17:58 ` Yang Shi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Yu Xu @ 2022-04-22 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yang Shi Cc: David Hildenbrand, Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On 4/23/22 12:03 AM, Yang Shi wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 8:27 PM Yu Xu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >> >> On 4/22/22 1:53 AM, Yang Shi wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 2:03 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, >>>>>> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. >>>>>> >>>>>> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 >>>>>> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 >>>>>> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 >>>>>> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) >>>>>> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 >>>>>> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 >>>>>> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) >>>>>> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>>>>> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! >>>>>> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI >>>>>> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 >>>>>> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 >>>>>> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 >>>>>> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b >>>>>> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 >>>>>> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 >>>>>> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff >>>>>> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff >>>>>> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 >>>>>> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 >>>>>> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 >>>>>> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >>>>>> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 >>>>>> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 >>>>>> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 >>>>>> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: >>>>>> [ 5.605101] <TASK> >>>>>> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 >>>>>> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 >>>>>> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 >>>>>> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 >>>>>> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 >>>>>> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 >>>>>> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae >>>>>> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 >>>>>> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 >>>>>> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c >>>>>> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 >>>>>> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 >>>>>> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 >>>>>> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 >>>>>> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 >>>>>> [ 5.616626] </TASK> >>>>>> >>>>>> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in >>>>>> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. >>>>> >>>>> Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm >>>>> actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting >>>>> huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. >>>> >>>> I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most >>>> probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we >>>> don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. >>> >>> Yeah, the huge zero page can't be met from normal paths other than >>> memory failure, but memory failure is a valid caller. So I tend to >>> replace the BUG to WARN + returning -EBUSY. If we don't care about the >>> reason code in memory failure, we don't have to touch memory failure. >> >> To make sure I understand this correctly, do you mean the following? > > Yes. And you should be able to drop your old patch as well. Thanks! And I have one more question, if doing so, the huge_zero_page will be set PG_has_hwpoisoned in memory_failure(), although PG_has_hwpoisoned is not checked in set_huge_zero_page(). It works, but isn't it a bit strange? To this point, as well as you mentioned that "the huge zero page can't be met from normal paths other than memory failure", I prefer to skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure(). How do you think? > >> >> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c >> index c468fee595ff..3bb464509518 100644 >> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c >> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c >> @@ -2496,10 +2496,12 @@ int split_huge_page_to_list(struct page *page, struct >> list_head *list) >> int extra_pins, ret; >> pgoff_t end; >> >> - VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head); >> VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(head), head); >> VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageCompound(head), head); >> >> + if (VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head)) >> + return -EBUSY; >> + >> if (PageWriteback(head)) >> return -EBUSY; >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> David / dhildenb >>>> >>>> >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Yu -- Thanks, Yu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-22 17:37 ` Yu Xu @ 2022-04-22 17:58 ` Yang Shi 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Yang Shi @ 2022-04-22 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yu Xu Cc: David Hildenbrand, Linux MM, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Andrew Morton, Miaohe Lin, Oscar Salvador On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 10:37 AM Yu Xu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > On 4/23/22 12:03 AM, Yang Shi wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 8:27 PM Yu Xu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 4/22/22 1:53 AM, Yang Shi wrote: > >>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 2:03 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 21.04.22 01:38, Yang Shi wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > >>>>>> when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 > >>>>>> [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 > >>>>>> [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 > >>>>>> [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) > >>>>>> [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > >>>>>> [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 > >>>>>> [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) > >>>>>> [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > >>>>>> [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! > >>>>>> [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > >>>>>> [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 > >>>>>> [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 > >>>>>> [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 > >>>>>> [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b > >>>>>> [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 > >>>>>> [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 > >>>>>> [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff > >>>>>> [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff > >>>>>> [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 > >>>>>> [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 > >>>>>> [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > >>>>>> [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > >>>>>> [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 > >>>>>> [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > >>>>>> [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > >>>>>> [ 5.604806] Call Trace: > >>>>>> [ 5.605101] <TASK> > >>>>>> [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 > >>>>>> [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 > >>>>>> [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 > >>>>>> [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 > >>>>>> [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 > >>>>>> [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 > >>>>>> [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > >>>>>> [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 > >>>>>> [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 > >>>>>> [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c > >>>>>> [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 > >>>>>> [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 > >>>>>> [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > >>>>>> [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 > >>>>>> [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 > >>>>>> [ 5.616626] </TASK> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in > >>>>>> memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. > >>>>> > >>>>> Skipping huge_zero_page in error injection is ok to me, but I'm > >>>>> actually wondering whether raising BUG is overkilling for splitting > >>>>> huge_zero_page or not. Returning -EBUSY should be totally fine. > >>>> > >>>> I tend to agree. Just failing with -EBUSY might be cleaner. Most > >>>> probably we want to catch any bogus code here that does something we > >>>> don't really expect -- splitting the huge zeropage makes 0 sense. > >>> > >>> Yeah, the huge zero page can't be met from normal paths other than > >>> memory failure, but memory failure is a valid caller. So I tend to > >>> replace the BUG to WARN + returning -EBUSY. If we don't care about the > >>> reason code in memory failure, we don't have to touch memory failure. > >> > >> To make sure I understand this correctly, do you mean the following? > > > > Yes. And you should be able to drop your old patch as well. > > Thanks! > > And I have one more question, if doing so, the huge_zero_page will be set > PG_has_hwpoisoned in memory_failure(), although PG_has_hwpoisoned is not > checked in set_huge_zero_page(). It works, but isn't it a bit strange? Thanks for noticing this. IMHO it seems like an existing bug. The anonymous page fault doesn't check if the page is poisoned or not since it typically gets a fresh allocated page and assumes the poisoned page (isolated successfully) can't be reallocated again. But huge zero page and base zero page are reused every time. So no matter what fix we pick, the issue is always there. > > To this point, as well as you mentioned that "the huge zero page can't be > met from normal paths other than memory failure", I prefer to skip > huge_zero_page in memory_failure(). > > How do you think? > > > > >> > >> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c > >> index c468fee595ff..3bb464509518 100644 > >> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c > >> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c > >> @@ -2496,10 +2496,12 @@ int split_huge_page_to_list(struct page *page, struct > >> list_head *list) > >> int extra_pins, ret; > >> pgoff_t end; > >> > >> - VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head); > >> VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(head), head); > >> VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageCompound(head), head); > >> > >> + if (VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head), head)) > >> + return -EBUSY; > >> + > >> if (PageWriteback(head)) > >> return -EBUSY; > >> > >> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> > >>>> David / dhildenb > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks, > >> Yu > > -- > Thanks, > Yu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-12 15:11 [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() Xu Yu 2022-04-12 20:01 ` Andrew Morton 2022-04-20 23:38 ` Yang Shi @ 2022-04-21 11:15 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-23 3:16 ` Yu Xu 3 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Anshuman Khandual @ 2022-04-21 11:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xu Yu, linux-mm; +Cc: naoya.horiguchi, akpm, linmiaohe, osalvador On 4/12/22 20:41, Xu Yu wrote: > Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > > [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 > [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 > [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 > [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) > [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 > [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) > [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! > [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 > [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 > [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 > [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b > [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 > [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff > [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff > [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 > [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 > [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 > [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > [ 5.604806] Call Trace: > [ 5.605101] <TASK> > [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 > [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 > [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 > [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 > [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 > [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 > [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 > [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 > [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c > [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 > [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 > [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 > [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.616626] </TASK> > > This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in > memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. > > Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com> > Suggested-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > Signed-off-by: Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > mm/memory-failure.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c > index dcb6bb9cf731..8788ea49bd28 100644 > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c > @@ -1799,6 +1799,19 @@ int memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int flags) > } > > if (PageTransHuge(hpage)) { > + /* > + * Bail out before SetPageHasHWPoisoned() if hpage is > + * huge_zero_page, although PG_has_hwpoisoned is not > + * checked in set_huge_zero_page(). > + * > + * TODO: Handle memory failure of huge_zero_page thoroughly. > + */ > + if (is_huge_zero_page(hpage)) { > + action_result(pfn, MF_MSG_UNSPLIT_THP, MF_IGNORED); Probably better to add a new and specific MF_MSG_ZERO_HUGE description instead ? > + res = -EBUSY; > + goto unlock_mutex; > + } > + > /* > * The flag must be set after the refcount is bumped > * otherwise it may race with THP split. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-12 15:11 [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() Xu Yu ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2022-04-21 11:15 ` Anshuman Khandual @ 2022-04-23 3:16 ` Yu Xu 2022-04-25 14:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Yu Xu @ 2022-04-23 3:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-mm, Yang Shi, David Hildenbrand, anshuman.khandual, Naoya Horiguchi Cc: akpm, linmiaohe, osalvador For this patch v2, Yang, David, Anshuman and Naoya all agree to fix the bug in split_huge_page_to_list(), i.e., to replace the BUG to WARN + returning -EBUSY for huge_zero_page. However, this patch v2 has just been merged into linux mainline. Sorry for that I didn't hurry up. So now, should we continue sending v3, or should we end this thread, and start a successive patch for optimization? On 4/12/22 11:11 PM, Xu Yu wrote: > Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page, > when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows. > > [ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000 > [ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00 > [ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 > [ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) > [ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 > [ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000 > [ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head)) > [ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499! > [ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > [ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11 > [ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014 > [ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880 > [ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b > [ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246 > [ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff > [ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff > [ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000 > [ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40 > [ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > [ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > [ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 > [ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > [ 5.604806] Call Trace: > [ 5.605101] <TASK> > [ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70 > [ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130 > [ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800 > [ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1 > [ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60 > [ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 > [ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > [ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9 > [ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8 > [ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c > [ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9 > [ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000 > [ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490 > [ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 > [ 5.616626] </TASK> > > This makes huge_zero_page bail out explicitly before split in > memory_failure(), thus the panic above won't happen again. > > Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com> > Suggested-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > Signed-off-by: Xu Yu <xuyu@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > mm/memory-failure.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c > index dcb6bb9cf731..8788ea49bd28 100644 > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c > @@ -1799,6 +1799,19 @@ int memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int flags) > } > > if (PageTransHuge(hpage)) { > + /* > + * Bail out before SetPageHasHWPoisoned() if hpage is > + * huge_zero_page, although PG_has_hwpoisoned is not > + * checked in set_huge_zero_page(). > + * > + * TODO: Handle memory failure of huge_zero_page thoroughly. > + */ > + if (is_huge_zero_page(hpage)) { > + action_result(pfn, MF_MSG_UNSPLIT_THP, MF_IGNORED); > + res = -EBUSY; > + goto unlock_mutex; > + } > + > /* > * The flag must be set after the refcount is bumped > * otherwise it may race with THP split. -- Thanks, Yu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-23 3:16 ` Yu Xu @ 2022-04-25 14:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-26 6:48 ` Anshuman Khandual 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-04-25 14:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yu Xu Cc: linux-mm, Yang Shi, David Hildenbrand, anshuman.khandual, akpm, linmiaohe, osalvador On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 11:16:20AM +0800, Yu Xu wrote: > For this patch v2, > > Yang, David, Anshuman and Naoya all agree to fix the bug in > split_huge_page_to_list(), i.e., to replace the BUG to > WARN + returning -EBUSY for huge_zero_page. > > However, this patch v2 has just been merged into linux mainline. > Sorry for that I didn't hurry up. > > So now, should we continue sending v3, or should we end this > thread, and start a successive patch for optimization? No problem, you can start a new thread for additional patches. Maybe it's better to have separate patches (starting with one reverting v2 and then one doing v3). Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-25 14:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-04-26 6:48 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-26 6:58 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Anshuman Khandual @ 2022-04-26 6:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也), Yu Xu Cc: linux-mm, Yang Shi, David Hildenbrand, akpm, linmiaohe, osalvador On 4/25/22 19:46, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote: > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 11:16:20AM +0800, Yu Xu wrote: >> For this patch v2, >> >> Yang, David, Anshuman and Naoya all agree to fix the bug in >> split_huge_page_to_list(), i.e., to replace the BUG to >> WARN + returning -EBUSY for huge_zero_page. >> >> However, this patch v2 has just been merged into linux mainline. >> Sorry for that I didn't hurry up. >> >> So now, should we continue sending v3, or should we end this >> thread, and start a successive patch for optimization? > > No problem, you can start a new thread for additional patches. > Maybe it's better to have separate patches (starting with one > reverting v2 and then one doing v3). May be also pull in the following patch which adds MF_MSG_HUGE_ZERO in the same series ? https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20220425080306.1771480-1-anshuman.khandual@arm.com/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-26 6:48 ` Anshuman Khandual @ 2022-04-26 6:58 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-05-02 5:59 ` Anshuman Khandual 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-04-26 6:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Yu Xu, linux-mm, Yang Shi, David Hildenbrand, akpm, linmiaohe, osalvador On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:18:39PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > > On 4/25/22 19:46, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 11:16:20AM +0800, Yu Xu wrote: > >> For this patch v2, > >> > >> Yang, David, Anshuman and Naoya all agree to fix the bug in > >> split_huge_page_to_list(), i.e., to replace the BUG to > >> WARN + returning -EBUSY for huge_zero_page. > >> > >> However, this patch v2 has just been merged into linux mainline. > >> Sorry for that I didn't hurry up. > >> > >> So now, should we continue sending v3, or should we end this > >> thread, and start a successive patch for optimization? > > > > No problem, you can start a new thread for additional patches. > > Maybe it's better to have separate patches (starting with one > > reverting v2 and then one doing v3). > > May be also pull in the following patch which adds MF_MSG_HUGE_ZERO > in the same series ? > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20220425080306.1771480-1-anshuman.khandual@arm.com/ I don't think so. I think that Yu's v3 would solely solve the reported problem, so any check for huge_zero_page in memory_failire() should not be needed. (But correct me if I miss something ...) Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() 2022-04-26 6:58 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) @ 2022-05-02 5:59 ` Anshuman Khandual 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Anshuman Khandual @ 2022-05-02 5:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) Cc: Yu Xu, linux-mm, Yang Shi, David Hildenbrand, akpm, linmiaohe, osalvador On 4/26/22 12:28, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:18:39PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> >> >> On 4/25/22 19:46, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 11:16:20AM +0800, Yu Xu wrote: >>>> For this patch v2, >>>> >>>> Yang, David, Anshuman and Naoya all agree to fix the bug in >>>> split_huge_page_to_list(), i.e., to replace the BUG to >>>> WARN + returning -EBUSY for huge_zero_page. >>>> >>>> However, this patch v2 has just been merged into linux mainline. >>>> Sorry for that I didn't hurry up. >>>> >>>> So now, should we continue sending v3, or should we end this >>>> thread, and start a successive patch for optimization? >>> >>> No problem, you can start a new thread for additional patches. >>> Maybe it's better to have separate patches (starting with one >>> reverting v2 and then one doing v3). >> >> May be also pull in the following patch which adds MF_MSG_HUGE_ZERO >> in the same series ? >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20220425080306.1771480-1-anshuman.khandual@arm.com/ > > I don't think so. I think that Yu's v3 would solely solve the reported > problem, so any check for huge_zero_page in memory_failire() should not > be needed. (But correct me if I miss something ...) Never mind, you are right. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-05-02 5:59 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 19+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-04-12 15:11 [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure.c: skip huge_zero_page in memory_failure() Xu Yu 2022-04-12 20:01 ` Andrew Morton 2022-04-15 6:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-16 1:47 ` Miaohe Lin 2022-04-20 23:38 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-21 9:03 ` David Hildenbrand 2022-04-21 11:18 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-21 17:53 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-22 1:00 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-22 3:27 ` Yu Xu 2022-04-22 16:03 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-22 17:37 ` Yu Xu 2022-04-22 17:58 ` Yang Shi 2022-04-21 11:15 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-23 3:16 ` Yu Xu 2022-04-25 14:16 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-04-26 6:48 ` Anshuman Khandual 2022-04-26 6:58 ` HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) 2022-05-02 5:59 ` Anshuman Khandual
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.