From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: Uncharge poisoned pages
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 11:18:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170509091823.GF6481@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170508025827.GA4913@hori1.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
On Mon 08-05-17 02:58:36, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 08:55:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 02-05-17 16:59:30, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> > > On 28/04/2017 15:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > This is getting quite hairy. What is the expected page count of the
> > > > hwpoison page?
> >
> > OK, so from the quick check of the hwpoison code it seems that the ref
> > count will be > 1 (from get_hwpoison_page).
> >
> > > > I guess we would need to update the VM_BUG_ON in the
> > > > memcg uncharge code to ignore the page count of hwpoison pages if it can
> > > > be arbitrary.
> > >
> > > Based on the experiment I did, page count == 2 when isolate_lru_page()
> > > succeeds, even in the case of a poisoned page.
> >
> > that would make some sense to me. The page should have been already
> > unmapped therefore but memory_failure increases the ref count and 1 is
> > for isolate_lru_page().
>
> # sorry for late reply, I was on holidays last week...
>
> Right, and the refcount taken for memory_failure is not freed after
> memory_failure() returns. unpoison_memory() does free the refcount.
OK, from the charge POV this would be safe because we clear page->memcg
so it wouldn't get uncharged more times.
> > > In my case I think this
> > > is because the page is still used by the process which is calling madvise().
> > >
> > > I'm wondering if I'm looking at the right place. May be the poisoned
> > > page should remain attach to the memory_cgroup until no one is using it.
> > > In that case this means that something should be done when the page is
> > > off-lined... I've to dig further here.
> >
> > No, AFAIU the page will not drop the reference count down to 0 in most
> > cases. Maybe there are some scenarios where this can happen but I would
> > expect that the poisoned page will be mapped and in use most of the time
> > and won't drop down 0. And then we should really uncharge it because it
> > will pin the memcg and make it unfreeable which doesn't seem to be what
> > we want. So does the following work reasonable? Andi, Johannes, what do
> > you think? I cannot say I would be really comfortable touching hwpoison
> > code as I really do not understand the workflow. Maybe we want to move
> > this uncharge down to memory_failure() right before we report success?
>
> memory_failure() can be called for any types of page (including slab or
> any kernel/driver pages), and the reported problem seems happen only on
> in-use user pages, so uncharging in delete_from_lru_cache() as done below
> looks better to me.
Yeah, we do see problems only for LRU/page cache pages but my
understanding is that error_states (e.g. me_kernel for the kernel
memory) might change in the future and then we wouldn't catch the same
bug, no?
> > ---
> > From 8bf0791bcf35996a859b6d33fb5494e5b53de49d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> > Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 20:32:24 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH] hwpoison, memcg: forcibly uncharge LRU pages
> >
> > Laurent Dufour has noticed that hwpoinsoned pages are kept charged. In
> > his particular case he has hit a bad_page("page still charged to cgroup")
> > when onlining a hwpoison page.
>
> > While this looks like something that shouldn't
> > happen in the first place because onlining hwpages and returning them to
> > the page allocator makes only little sense it shows a real problem.
> >
> > hwpoison pages do not get freed usually so we do not uncharge them (at
> > least not since 0a31bc97c80c ("mm: memcontrol: rewrite uncharge API")).
> > Each charge pins memcg (since e8ea14cc6ead ("mm: memcontrol: take a css
> > reference for each charged page")) as well and so the mem_cgroup and the
> > associated state will never go away. Fix this leak by forcibly
> > uncharging a LRU hwpoisoned page in delete_from_lru_cache(). We also
> > have to tweak uncharge_list because it cannot rely on zero ref count
> > for these pages.
> >
> > Fixes: 0a31bc97c80c ("mm: memcontrol: rewrite uncharge API")
> > Reported-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>
Thanks! I will wait a day or two for Johannes and repost the patch.
Andrew could you drop
http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/mm-uncharge-poisoned-pages.patch
in the mean time, please?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-09 9:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-25 14:27 [PATCH v2 0/2] BUG raised when onlining HWPoisoned page Laurent Dufour
2017-04-25 14:27 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: Uncharge poisoned pages Laurent Dufour
2017-04-25 23:48 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2017-04-26 1:54 ` Balbir Singh
2017-04-26 2:34 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2017-04-26 3:45 ` Balbir Singh
2017-04-26 4:46 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2017-04-26 8:59 ` Balbir Singh
2017-04-28 9:32 ` Laurent Dufour
2017-04-27 14:37 ` Michal Hocko
2017-04-27 20:51 ` Andi Kleen
2017-04-28 6:07 ` Michal Hocko
2017-04-28 7:31 ` Michal Hocko
2017-04-28 9:17 ` Laurent Dufour
2017-04-28 13:48 ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-02 14:59 ` Laurent Dufour
2017-05-02 18:55 ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03 11:34 ` Laurent Dufour
2017-05-04 1:21 ` Balbir Singh
2017-05-08 10:42 ` Laurent Dufour
2017-05-09 1:41 ` Balbir Singh
2017-05-08 2:58 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2017-05-09 9:18 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-05-09 22:59 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2017-04-25 14:27 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: skip HWPoisoned pages when onlining pages Laurent Dufour
2017-04-26 2:10 ` Balbir Singh
2017-04-26 3:13 ` Naoya Horiguchi
2017-04-28 2:51 ` Balbir Singh
2017-04-28 6:30 ` Michal Hocko
2017-04-28 6:50 ` Michal Hocko
2017-04-28 6:51 ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-10 7:41 ` Michal Hocko
2018-01-17 23:03 ` Andrew Morton
2018-01-23 18:15 ` Laurent Dufour
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=20170509091823.GF6481@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).