* [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation
@ 2018-07-17 5:32 Naoya Horiguchi
2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages Naoya Horiguchi
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-17 5:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mm
Cc: Michal Hocko, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel
I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks:
- updated comments (from Andrew),
- moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c,
which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(),
- lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied.
> mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page':
> >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function
> 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'?
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page))
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> is_free_buddy_page
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it
in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/
will fix this.
v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
---
Summary:
Naoya Horiguchi (2):
mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages
mm: soft-offline: close the race against page allocation
include/linux/page-flags.h | 5 +++++
include/linux/swapops.h | 10 ---------
mm/hugetlb.c | 11 +++++-----
mm/memory-failure.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
mm/migrate.c | 11 ----------
mm/page_alloc.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
6 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-17 5:32 [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-17 5:32 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-17 14:27 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: soft-offline: close the race against page allocation Naoya Horiguchi 2018-08-15 22:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix " Andrew Morton 2 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-17 5:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-mm Cc: Michal Hocko, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. The process killing is caused by the following flow: CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 soft offline get_any_page // find the hugetlb is free mmap a hugetlb file page fault ... hugetlb_fault hugetlb_no_page alloc_huge_page // succeed soft_offline_free_page // set hwpoison flag mmap the hugetlb file page fault ... hugetlb_fault hugetlb_no_page find_lock_page return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON mm_fault_error do_sigbus // kill the process The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: CPU 0 CPU 1 mmap a hugetlb file // reserve all free page but don't fault-in soft offline get_any_page // find the hugetlb is free soft_offline_free_page // set hwpoison flag dissolve_free_huge_page // fail because all free hugepages are reserved page fault ... hugetlb_fault hugetlb_no_page alloc_huge_page ... dequeue_huge_page_node_exact // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage // and finally fail due to no-mem The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag only after containment of the error page completes successfully. Reported-by: Xishi Qiu <xishi.qiuxishi@alibaba-inc.com> Suggested-by: Xishi Qiu <xishi.qiuxishi@alibaba-inc.com> Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> --- changelog v1->v2: - don't use set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() (not defined yet) - updated comment in soft_offline_huge_page() --- mm/hugetlb.c | 11 +++++------ mm/memory-failure.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ mm/migrate.c | 2 -- 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/hugetlb.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/hugetlb.c index 430be42..937c142 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/hugetlb.c +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/hugetlb.c @@ -1479,22 +1479,20 @@ static int free_pool_huge_page(struct hstate *h, nodemask_t *nodes_allowed, /* * Dissolve a given free hugepage into free buddy pages. This function does * nothing for in-use (including surplus) hugepages. Returns -EBUSY if the - * number of free hugepages would be reduced below the number of reserved - * hugepages. + * dissolution fails because a give page is not a free hugepage, or because + * free hugepages are fully reserved. */ int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page) { - int rc = 0; + int rc = -EBUSY; spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock); if (PageHuge(page) && !page_count(page)) { struct page *head = compound_head(page); struct hstate *h = page_hstate(head); int nid = page_to_nid(head); - if (h->free_huge_pages - h->resv_huge_pages == 0) { - rc = -EBUSY; + if (h->free_huge_pages - h->resv_huge_pages == 0) goto out; - } /* * Move PageHWPoison flag from head page to the raw error page, * which makes any subpages rather than the error page reusable. @@ -1508,6 +1506,7 @@ int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page) h->free_huge_pages_node[nid]--; h->max_huge_pages--; update_and_free_page(h, head); + rc = 0; } out: spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock); diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c index 9d142b9..9b77f85 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c @@ -1598,8 +1598,20 @@ static int soft_offline_huge_page(struct page *page, int flags) if (ret > 0) ret = -EIO; } else { - if (PageHuge(page)) - dissolve_free_huge_page(page); + /* + * We set PG_hwpoison only when the migration source hugepage + * was successfully dissolved, because otherwise hwpoisoned + * hugepage remains on free hugepage list. The allocator ignores + * such a hwpoisoned page so it's never allocated, but it could + * kill a process because of no-memory rather than hwpoison. + * Soft-offline never impacts the userspace, so this is + * undesired. + */ + ret = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); + if (!ret) { + if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) + num_poisoned_pages_inc(); + } } return ret; } @@ -1715,13 +1727,13 @@ static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page, int flags) static void soft_offline_free_page(struct page *page) { + int rc = 0; struct page *head = compound_head(page); - if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(head)) { + if (PageHuge(head)) + rc = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); + if (!rc && !TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) num_poisoned_pages_inc(); - if (PageHuge(head)) - dissolve_free_huge_page(page); - } } /** diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c index 198af42..3ae213b 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c @@ -1318,8 +1318,6 @@ static int unmap_and_move_huge_page(new_page_t get_new_page, out: if (rc != -EAGAIN) putback_active_hugepage(hpage); - if (reason == MR_MEMORY_FAILURE && !test_set_page_hwpoison(hpage)) - num_poisoned_pages_inc(); /* * If migration was not successful and there's a freeing callback, use -- 2.7.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-17 14:27 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-17 20:10 ` Mike Kravetz 2018-07-18 0:55 ` Naoya Horiguchi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-17 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > > The process killing is caused by the following flow: > > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > > soft offline > get_any_page > // find the hugetlb is free > mmap a hugetlb file > page fault > ... > hugetlb_fault > hugetlb_no_page > alloc_huge_page > // succeed > soft_offline_free_page > // set hwpoison flag > mmap the hugetlb file > page fault > ... > hugetlb_fault > hugetlb_no_page > find_lock_page > return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > mm_fault_error > do_sigbus > // kill the process > > > The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > > CPU 0 CPU 1 > > mmap a hugetlb file > // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > soft offline > get_any_page > // find the hugetlb is free > soft_offline_free_page > // set hwpoison flag > dissolve_free_huge_page > // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > page fault > ... > hugetlb_fault > hugetlb_no_page > alloc_huge_page > ... > dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > // and finally fail due to no-mem > > The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > only after containment of the error page completes successfully. Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? Do I get it right that the only difference between the hard and soft offlining is that hugetlb reserves might break for the former while not for the latter and that the failed migration kills all owners for the former while not for latter? > Reported-by: Xishi Qiu <xishi.qiuxishi@alibaba-inc.com> > Suggested-by: Xishi Qiu <xishi.qiuxishi@alibaba-inc.com> > Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> > --- > changelog v1->v2: > - don't use set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() (not defined yet) > - updated comment in soft_offline_huge_page() > --- > mm/hugetlb.c | 11 +++++------ > mm/memory-failure.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ > mm/migrate.c | 2 -- > 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/hugetlb.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/hugetlb.c > index 430be42..937c142 100644 > --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/hugetlb.c > +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/hugetlb.c > @@ -1479,22 +1479,20 @@ static int free_pool_huge_page(struct hstate *h, nodemask_t *nodes_allowed, > /* > * Dissolve a given free hugepage into free buddy pages. This function does > * nothing for in-use (including surplus) hugepages. Returns -EBUSY if the > - * number of free hugepages would be reduced below the number of reserved > - * hugepages. > + * dissolution fails because a give page is not a free hugepage, or because > + * free hugepages are fully reserved. > */ > int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page) > { > - int rc = 0; > + int rc = -EBUSY; > > spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock); > if (PageHuge(page) && !page_count(page)) { > struct page *head = compound_head(page); > struct hstate *h = page_hstate(head); > int nid = page_to_nid(head); > - if (h->free_huge_pages - h->resv_huge_pages == 0) { > - rc = -EBUSY; > + if (h->free_huge_pages - h->resv_huge_pages == 0) > goto out; > - } > /* > * Move PageHWPoison flag from head page to the raw error page, > * which makes any subpages rather than the error page reusable. > @@ -1508,6 +1506,7 @@ int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page) > h->free_huge_pages_node[nid]--; > h->max_huge_pages--; > update_and_free_page(h, head); > + rc = 0; > } > out: > spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock); > diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c > index 9d142b9..9b77f85 100644 > --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c > +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c > @@ -1598,8 +1598,20 @@ static int soft_offline_huge_page(struct page *page, int flags) > if (ret > 0) > ret = -EIO; > } else { > - if (PageHuge(page)) > - dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > + /* > + * We set PG_hwpoison only when the migration source hugepage > + * was successfully dissolved, because otherwise hwpoisoned > + * hugepage remains on free hugepage list. The allocator ignores > + * such a hwpoisoned page so it's never allocated, but it could > + * kill a process because of no-memory rather than hwpoison. > + * Soft-offline never impacts the userspace, so this is > + * undesired. > + */ > + ret = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > + if (!ret) { > + if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) > + num_poisoned_pages_inc(); > + } > } > return ret; > } > @@ -1715,13 +1727,13 @@ static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page, int flags) > > static void soft_offline_free_page(struct page *page) > { > + int rc = 0; > struct page *head = compound_head(page); > > - if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(head)) { > + if (PageHuge(head)) > + rc = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > + if (!rc && !TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) > num_poisoned_pages_inc(); > - if (PageHuge(head)) > - dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > - } > } > > /** > diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c > index 198af42..3ae213b 100644 > --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c > +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c > @@ -1318,8 +1318,6 @@ static int unmap_and_move_huge_page(new_page_t get_new_page, > out: > if (rc != -EAGAIN) > putback_active_hugepage(hpage); > - if (reason == MR_MEMORY_FAILURE && !test_set_page_hwpoison(hpage)) > - num_poisoned_pages_inc(); > > /* > * If migration was not successful and there's a freeing callback, use > -- > 2.7.0 -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-17 14:27 ` Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-17 20:10 ` Mike Kravetz 2018-07-18 1:28 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 0:55 ` Naoya Horiguchi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Mike Kravetz @ 2018-07-17 20:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko, Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On 07/17/2018 07:27 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: >> There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which >> causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. >> >> The process killing is caused by the following flow: >> >> CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 >> >> soft offline >> get_any_page >> // find the hugetlb is free >> mmap a hugetlb file >> page fault >> ... >> hugetlb_fault >> hugetlb_no_page >> alloc_huge_page >> // succeed >> soft_offline_free_page >> // set hwpoison flag >> mmap the hugetlb file >> page fault >> ... >> hugetlb_fault >> hugetlb_no_page >> find_lock_page >> return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON >> mm_fault_error >> do_sigbus >> // kill the process >> >> >> The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: >> >> CPU 0 CPU 1 >> >> mmap a hugetlb file >> // reserve all free page but don't fault-in >> soft offline >> get_any_page >> // find the hugetlb is free >> soft_offline_free_page >> // set hwpoison flag >> dissolve_free_huge_page >> // fail because all free hugepages are reserved >> page fault >> ... >> hugetlb_fault >> hugetlb_no_page >> alloc_huge_page >> ... >> dequeue_huge_page_node_exact >> // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage >> // and finally fail due to no-mem >> >> The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written >> based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to >> avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() >> or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is >> about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. >> This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag >> only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? My understanding may not be corect, but just looking at the current code for soft_offline_free_page helps me understand: static void soft_offline_free_page(struct page *page) { struct page *head = compound_head(page); if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(head)) { num_poisoned_pages_inc(); if (PageHuge(head)) dissolve_free_huge_page(page); } } The HWPoison flag is set before even checking to determine if the huge page can be dissolved. So, someone could could attempt to pull the page off the free list (if free) or fault/map it (if already associated with a file) which leads to the failures described above. The patches ensure that we only set HWPoison after successfully dissolving the page. At least that is how I understand it. It seems that soft_offline_free_page can be called for in use pages. Certainly, that is the case in the first workflow above. With the suggested changes, I think this is OK for huge pages. However, it seems that setting HWPoison on a in use non-huge page could cause issues? While looking at the code, I noticed this comment in __get_any_page() /* * When the target page is a free hugepage, just remove it * from free hugepage list. */ Did that apply to some code that was removed? It does not seem to make any sense in that routine. -- Mike Kravetz ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-17 20:10 ` Mike Kravetz @ 2018-07-18 1:28 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 2:36 ` Mike Kravetz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-18 1:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mike Kravetz Cc: Michal Hocko, linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 01:10:39PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote: > On 07/17/2018 07:27 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > >> There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > >> causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > >> > >> The process killing is caused by the following flow: > >> > >> CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > >> > >> soft offline > >> get_any_page > >> // find the hugetlb is free > >> mmap a hugetlb file > >> page fault > >> ... > >> hugetlb_fault > >> hugetlb_no_page > >> alloc_huge_page > >> // succeed > >> soft_offline_free_page > >> // set hwpoison flag > >> mmap the hugetlb file > >> page fault > >> ... > >> hugetlb_fault > >> hugetlb_no_page > >> find_lock_page > >> return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > >> mm_fault_error > >> do_sigbus > >> // kill the process > >> > >> > >> The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > >> > >> CPU 0 CPU 1 > >> > >> mmap a hugetlb file > >> // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > >> soft offline > >> get_any_page > >> // find the hugetlb is free > >> soft_offline_free_page > >> // set hwpoison flag > >> dissolve_free_huge_page > >> // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > >> page fault > >> ... > >> hugetlb_fault > >> hugetlb_no_page > >> alloc_huge_page > >> ... > >> dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > >> // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > >> // and finally fail due to no-mem > >> > >> The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > >> based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > >> avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > >> or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > >> about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > >> This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > >> only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? > > My understanding may not be corect, but just looking at the current code > for soft_offline_free_page helps me understand: > > static void soft_offline_free_page(struct page *page) > { > struct page *head = compound_head(page); > > if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(head)) { > num_poisoned_pages_inc(); > if (PageHuge(head)) > dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > } > } > > The HWPoison flag is set before even checking to determine if the huge > page can be dissolved. So, someone could could attempt to pull the page > off the free list (if free) or fault/map it (if already associated with > a file) which leads to the failures described above. The patches ensure > that we only set HWPoison after successfully dissolving the page. At least > that is how I understand it. Thanks for elaborating, this is correct. > > It seems that soft_offline_free_page can be called for in use pages. > Certainly, that is the case in the first workflow above. With the > suggested changes, I think this is OK for huge pages. However, it seems > that setting HWPoison on a in use non-huge page could cause issues? Just after dissolve_free_huge_page() returns, the target page is just a free buddy page without PageHWPoison set. If this page is allocated immediately, that's "migration succeeded, but soft offline failed" case, so no problem. Certainly, there also is a race between cheking TestSetPageHWPoison and page allocation, so this issue is handled in patch 2/2. > While looking at the code, I noticed this comment in __get_any_page() > /* > * When the target page is a free hugepage, just remove it > * from free hugepage list. > */ > Did that apply to some code that was removed? It does not seem to make > any sense in that routine. This comment is completely obsolete, I'll remove this one. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-18 1:28 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-18 2:36 ` Mike Kravetz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Mike Kravetz @ 2018-07-18 2:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: Michal Hocko, linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On 07/17/2018 06:28 PM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 01:10:39PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote: >> It seems that soft_offline_free_page can be called for in use pages. >> Certainly, that is the case in the first workflow above. With the >> suggested changes, I think this is OK for huge pages. However, it seems >> that setting HWPoison on a in use non-huge page could cause issues? > > Just after dissolve_free_huge_page() returns, the target page is just a > free buddy page without PageHWPoison set. If this page is allocated > immediately, that's "migration succeeded, but soft offline failed" case, > so no problem. > Certainly, there also is a race between cheking TestSetPageHWPoison and > page allocation, so this issue is handled in patch 2/2. Yes, the issue of calling soft_offline_free_page() for an 'in use' page is handled in the new routine set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() of patch 2/2. Thanks, -- Mike Kravetz ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-17 14:27 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-17 20:10 ` Mike Kravetz @ 2018-07-18 0:55 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 1:41 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 8:50 ` Michal Hocko 1 sibling, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-18 0:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:27:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > > causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > > > > The process killing is caused by the following flow: > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > > > > soft offline > > get_any_page > > // find the hugetlb is free > > mmap a hugetlb file > > page fault > > ... > > hugetlb_fault > > hugetlb_no_page > > alloc_huge_page > > // succeed > > soft_offline_free_page > > // set hwpoison flag > > mmap the hugetlb file > > page fault > > ... > > hugetlb_fault > > hugetlb_no_page > > find_lock_page > > return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > > mm_fault_error > > do_sigbus > > // kill the process > > > > > > The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > > soft offline > > get_any_page > > // find the hugetlb is free > > soft_offline_free_page > > // set hwpoison flag > > dissolve_free_huge_page > > // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > > page fault > > ... > > hugetlb_fault > > hugetlb_no_page > > alloc_huge_page > > ... > > dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > > // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > > // and finally fail due to no-mem > > > > The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > > based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > > avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > > or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > > about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > > This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > > only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? (Considering soft offlining free hugepage,) PageHWPoison is set at first before this patch, which is racy with hugetlb fault code because it's not protected by hugetlb_lock. Originally this was written in the similar manner as hard-offline, where the race is accepted and a PageHWPoison flag is set as soon as possible. But actually that's found not necessary/correct because soft offline is supposed to be less aggressive and failure is OK. So this patch is suggesting to make soft-offline less aggressive by moving SetPageHWPoison into the lock. > > Do I get it right that the only difference between the hard and soft > offlining is that hugetlb reserves might break for the former while not > for the latter Correct. > and that the failed migration kills all owners for the > former while not for latter? Hard-offline doesn't cause any page migration because the data is already lost, but yes it can kill the owners. Soft-offline never kills processes even if it fails (due to migration failrue or some other reasons.) I listed below some common points and differences between hard-offline and soft-offline. common points - they are both contained by PageHWPoison flag, - error is injected via simliar interfaces. differences - the data on the page is considered lost in hard offline, but is not in soft offline, - hard offline likely kills the affected processes, but soft offline never kills processes, - soft offline causes page migration, but hard offline does not, - hard offline prioritizes to prevent consumption of broken data with accepting some race, and soft offline prioritizes not to impact userspace with accepting failure. Looks to me that there're more differences rather than commont points. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi > > > Reported-by: Xishi Qiu <xishi.qiuxishi@alibaba-inc.com> > > Suggested-by: Xishi Qiu <xishi.qiuxishi@alibaba-inc.com> > > Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> > > --- > > changelog v1->v2: > > - don't use set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() (not defined yet) > > - updated comment in soft_offline_huge_page() > > --- > > mm/hugetlb.c | 11 +++++------ > > mm/memory-failure.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ > > mm/migrate.c | 2 -- > > 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/hugetlb.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/hugetlb.c > > index 430be42..937c142 100644 > > --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/hugetlb.c > > +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/hugetlb.c > > @@ -1479,22 +1479,20 @@ static int free_pool_huge_page(struct hstate *h, nodemask_t *nodes_allowed, > > /* > > * Dissolve a given free hugepage into free buddy pages. This function does > > * nothing for in-use (including surplus) hugepages. Returns -EBUSY if the > > - * number of free hugepages would be reduced below the number of reserved > > - * hugepages. > > + * dissolution fails because a give page is not a free hugepage, or because > > + * free hugepages are fully reserved. > > */ > > int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page) > > { > > - int rc = 0; > > + int rc = -EBUSY; > > > > spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock); > > if (PageHuge(page) && !page_count(page)) { > > struct page *head = compound_head(page); > > struct hstate *h = page_hstate(head); > > int nid = page_to_nid(head); > > - if (h->free_huge_pages - h->resv_huge_pages == 0) { > > - rc = -EBUSY; > > + if (h->free_huge_pages - h->resv_huge_pages == 0) > > goto out; > > - } > > /* > > * Move PageHWPoison flag from head page to the raw error page, > > * which makes any subpages rather than the error page reusable. > > @@ -1508,6 +1506,7 @@ int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page) > > h->free_huge_pages_node[nid]--; > > h->max_huge_pages--; > > update_and_free_page(h, head); > > + rc = 0; > > } > > out: > > spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock); > > diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c > > index 9d142b9..9b77f85 100644 > > --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c > > +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c > > @@ -1598,8 +1598,20 @@ static int soft_offline_huge_page(struct page *page, int flags) > > if (ret > 0) > > ret = -EIO; > > } else { > > - if (PageHuge(page)) > > - dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > > + /* > > + * We set PG_hwpoison only when the migration source hugepage > > + * was successfully dissolved, because otherwise hwpoisoned > > + * hugepage remains on free hugepage list. The allocator ignores > > + * such a hwpoisoned page so it's never allocated, but it could > > + * kill a process because of no-memory rather than hwpoison. > > + * Soft-offline never impacts the userspace, so this is > > + * undesired. > > + */ > > + ret = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > > + if (!ret) { > > + if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) > > + num_poisoned_pages_inc(); > > + } > > } > > return ret; > > } > > @@ -1715,13 +1727,13 @@ static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page, int flags) > > > > static void soft_offline_free_page(struct page *page) > > { > > + int rc = 0; > > struct page *head = compound_head(page); > > > > - if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(head)) { > > + if (PageHuge(head)) > > + rc = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > > + if (!rc && !TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) > > num_poisoned_pages_inc(); > > - if (PageHuge(head)) > > - dissolve_free_huge_page(page); > > - } > > } > > > > /** > > diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c > > index 198af42..3ae213b 100644 > > --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c > > +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c > > @@ -1318,8 +1318,6 @@ static int unmap_and_move_huge_page(new_page_t get_new_page, > > out: > > if (rc != -EAGAIN) > > putback_active_hugepage(hpage); > > - if (reason == MR_MEMORY_FAILURE && !test_set_page_hwpoison(hpage)) > > - num_poisoned_pages_inc(); > > > > /* > > * If migration was not successful and there's a freeing callback, use > > -- > > 2.7.0 > > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-18 0:55 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-18 1:41 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 8:50 ` Michal Hocko 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-18 1:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:55:29AM +0000, Horiguchi Naoya(堀口 直也) wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:27:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > > > causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > > > > > > The process killing is caused by the following flow: > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > > > > > > soft offline > > > get_any_page > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > page fault > > > ... > > > hugetlb_fault > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > alloc_huge_page > > > // succeed > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > mmap the hugetlb file > > > page fault > > > ... > > > hugetlb_fault > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > find_lock_page > > > return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > > > mm_fault_error > > > do_sigbus > > > // kill the process > > > > > > > > > The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 > > > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > > > soft offline > > > get_any_page > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > dissolve_free_huge_page > > > // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > > > page fault > > > ... > > > hugetlb_fault > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > alloc_huge_page > > > ... > > > dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > > > // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > > > // and finally fail due to no-mem > > > > > > The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > > > based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > > > avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > > > or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > > > about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > > > This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > > > only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? > > (Considering soft offlining free hugepage,) > PageHWPoison is set at first before this patch, which is racy with > hugetlb fault code because it's not protected by hugetlb_lock. > > Originally this was written in the similar manner as hard-offline, where > the race is accepted and a PageHWPoison flag is set as soon as possible. > But actually that's found not necessary/correct because soft offline is > supposed to be less aggressive and failure is OK. > > So this patch is suggesting to make soft-offline less aggressive > by moving SetPageHWPoison into the lock. My apology, this part of reasoning was incorrect. What patch 1/2 actually does is transforming the issue into the normal page's similar race issue which is solved by patch 2/2. After patch 1/2, soft offline never sets PageHWPoison on hugepage. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi > > > > > Do I get it right that the only difference between the hard and soft > > offlining is that hugetlb reserves might break for the former while not > > for the latter > > Correct. > > > and that the failed migration kills all owners for the > > former while not for latter? > > Hard-offline doesn't cause any page migration because the data is already > lost, but yes it can kill the owners. > Soft-offline never kills processes even if it fails (due to migration failrue > or some other reasons.) > > I listed below some common points and differences between hard-offline > and soft-offline. > > common points > - they are both contained by PageHWPoison flag, > - error is injected via simliar interfaces. > > differences > - the data on the page is considered lost in hard offline, but is not > in soft offline, > - hard offline likely kills the affected processes, but soft offline > never kills processes, > - soft offline causes page migration, but hard offline does not, > - hard offline prioritizes to prevent consumption of broken data with > accepting some race, and soft offline prioritizes not to impact > userspace with accepting failure. > > Looks to me that there're more differences rather than commont points. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-18 0:55 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 1:41 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-18 8:50 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-19 6:19 ` Naoya Horiguchi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-18 8:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Wed 18-07-18 00:55:29, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:27:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > > > causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > > > > > > The process killing is caused by the following flow: > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > > > > > > soft offline > > > get_any_page > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > page fault > > > ... > > > hugetlb_fault > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > alloc_huge_page > > > // succeed > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > mmap the hugetlb file > > > page fault > > > ... > > > hugetlb_fault > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > find_lock_page > > > return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > > > mm_fault_error > > > do_sigbus > > > // kill the process > > > > > > > > > The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 > > > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > > > soft offline > > > get_any_page > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > dissolve_free_huge_page > > > // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > > > page fault > > > ... > > > hugetlb_fault > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > alloc_huge_page > > > ... > > > dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > > > // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > > > // and finally fail due to no-mem > > > > > > The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > > > based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > > > avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > > > or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > > > about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > > > This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > > > only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? > > (Considering soft offlining free hugepage,) > PageHWPoison is set at first before this patch, which is racy with > hugetlb fault code because it's not protected by hugetlb_lock. > > Originally this was written in the similar manner as hard-offline, where > the race is accepted and a PageHWPoison flag is set as soon as possible. > But actually that's found not necessary/correct because soft offline is > supposed to be less aggressive and failure is OK. OK > So this patch is suggesting to make soft-offline less aggressive by > moving SetPageHWPoison into the lock. I guess I still do not understand why we should even care about the ordering of the HWPoison flag setting. Why cannot we simply have the following code flow? Or maybe we are doing that already I just do not follow the code soft_offline check page_count - free - normal page - remove from the allocator - hugetlb - allocate a new hugetlb page && remove from the pool - used - migrate to a new page && never release the old one Why do we even need HWPoison flag here? Everything can be completely transparent to the application. It shouldn't fail from what I understood. > > Do I get it right that the only difference between the hard and soft > > offlining is that hugetlb reserves might break for the former while not > > for the latter > > Correct. > > > and that the failed migration kills all owners for the > > former while not for latter? > > Hard-offline doesn't cause any page migration because the data is already > lost, but yes it can kill the owners. > Soft-offline never kills processes even if it fails (due to migration failrue > or some other reasons.) > > I listed below some common points and differences between hard-offline > and soft-offline. > > common points > - they are both contained by PageHWPoison flag, > - error is injected via simliar interfaces. > > differences > - the data on the page is considered lost in hard offline, but is not > in soft offline, > - hard offline likely kills the affected processes, but soft offline > never kills processes, > - soft offline causes page migration, but hard offline does not, > - hard offline prioritizes to prevent consumption of broken data with > accepting some race, and soft offline prioritizes not to impact > userspace with accepting failure. > > Looks to me that there're more differences rather than commont points. Thanks for the summary. It certainly helped me -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-18 8:50 ` Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-19 6:19 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-19 7:15 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-19 6:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 18-07-18 00:55:29, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:27:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > > > > causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > > > > > > > > The process killing is caused by the following flow: > > > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > > > > > > > > soft offline > > > > get_any_page > > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > > page fault > > > > ... > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > alloc_huge_page > > > > // succeed > > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > > mmap the hugetlb file > > > > page fault > > > > ... > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > find_lock_page > > > > return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > > > > mm_fault_error > > > > do_sigbus > > > > // kill the process > > > > > > > > > > > > The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > > > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 > > > > > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > > // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > > > > soft offline > > > > get_any_page > > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > > dissolve_free_huge_page > > > > // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > > > > page fault > > > > ... > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > alloc_huge_page > > > > ... > > > > dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > > > > // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > > > > // and finally fail due to no-mem > > > > > > > > The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > > > > based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > > > > avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > > > > or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > > > > about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > > > > This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > > > > only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > > > > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > > > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > > > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > > > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > > > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > > > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > > > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? > > > > (Considering soft offlining free hugepage,) > > PageHWPoison is set at first before this patch, which is racy with > > hugetlb fault code because it's not protected by hugetlb_lock. > > > > Originally this was written in the similar manner as hard-offline, where > > the race is accepted and a PageHWPoison flag is set as soon as possible. > > But actually that's found not necessary/correct because soft offline is > > supposed to be less aggressive and failure is OK. > > OK > > > So this patch is suggesting to make soft-offline less aggressive by > > moving SetPageHWPoison into the lock. > > I guess I still do not understand why we should even care about the > ordering of the HWPoison flag setting. Why cannot we simply have the > following code flow? Or maybe we are doing that already I just do not > follow the code > > soft_offline > check page_count > - free - normal page - remove from the allocator > - hugetlb - allocate a new hugetlb page && remove from the pool > - used - migrate to a new page && never release the old one > > Why do we even need HWPoison flag here? Everything can be completely > transparent to the application. It shouldn't fail from what I > understood. PageHWPoison flag is used to the 'remove from the allocator' part which is like below: static inline struct page *rmqueue( ... do { page = NULL; if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER) { page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); if (page) trace_mm_page_alloc_zone_locked(page, order, migratetype); } if (!page) page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype); } while (page && check_new_pages(page, order)); check_new_pages() returns true if the page taken from free list has a hwpoison page so that the allocator iterates another round to get another page. There's no function that can be called from outside allocator to remove a page in allocator. So actual page removal is done at allocation time, not at error handling time. That's the reason why we need PageHWPoison. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi > > > Do I get it right that the only difference between the hard and soft > > > offlining is that hugetlb reserves might break for the former while not > > > for the latter > > > > Correct. > > > > > and that the failed migration kills all owners for the > > > former while not for latter? > > > > Hard-offline doesn't cause any page migration because the data is already > > lost, but yes it can kill the owners. > > Soft-offline never kills processes even if it fails (due to migration failrue > > or some other reasons.) > > > > I listed below some common points and differences between hard-offline > > and soft-offline. > > > > common points > > - they are both contained by PageHWPoison flag, > > - error is injected via simliar interfaces. > > > > differences > > - the data on the page is considered lost in hard offline, but is not > > in soft offline, > > - hard offline likely kills the affected processes, but soft offline > > never kills processes, > > - soft offline causes page migration, but hard offline does not, > > - hard offline prioritizes to prevent consumption of broken data with > > accepting some race, and soft offline prioritizes not to impact > > userspace with accepting failure. > > > > Looks to me that there're more differences rather than commont points. > > Thanks for the summary. It certainly helped me > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-19 6:19 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-19 7:15 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-19 8:08 ` Naoya Horiguchi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-19 7:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Thu 19-07-18 06:19:45, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 18-07-18 00:55:29, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:27:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > > There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > > > > > causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > > > > > > > > > > The process killing is caused by the following flow: > > > > > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > > > > > > > > > > soft offline > > > > > get_any_page > > > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > > > page fault > > > > > ... > > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > > alloc_huge_page > > > > > // succeed > > > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > > > mmap the hugetlb file > > > > > page fault > > > > > ... > > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > > find_lock_page > > > > > return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > > > > > mm_fault_error > > > > > do_sigbus > > > > > // kill the process > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > > > > > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 > > > > > > > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > > > // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > > > > > soft offline > > > > > get_any_page > > > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > > > dissolve_free_huge_page > > > > > // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > > > > > page fault > > > > > ... > > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > > alloc_huge_page > > > > > ... > > > > > dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > > > > > // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > > > > > // and finally fail due to no-mem > > > > > > > > > > The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > > > > > based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > > > > > avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > > > > > or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > > > > > about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > > > > > This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > > > > > only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > > > > > > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > > > > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > > > > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > > > > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > > > > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > > > > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > > > > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? > > > > > > (Considering soft offlining free hugepage,) > > > PageHWPoison is set at first before this patch, which is racy with > > > hugetlb fault code because it's not protected by hugetlb_lock. > > > > > > Originally this was written in the similar manner as hard-offline, where > > > the race is accepted and a PageHWPoison flag is set as soon as possible. > > > But actually that's found not necessary/correct because soft offline is > > > supposed to be less aggressive and failure is OK. > > > > OK > > > > > So this patch is suggesting to make soft-offline less aggressive by > > > moving SetPageHWPoison into the lock. > > > > I guess I still do not understand why we should even care about the > > ordering of the HWPoison flag setting. Why cannot we simply have the > > following code flow? Or maybe we are doing that already I just do not > > follow the code > > > > soft_offline > > check page_count > > - free - normal page - remove from the allocator > > - hugetlb - allocate a new hugetlb page && remove from the pool > > - used - migrate to a new page && never release the old one > > > > Why do we even need HWPoison flag here? Everything can be completely > > transparent to the application. It shouldn't fail from what I > > understood. > > PageHWPoison flag is used to the 'remove from the allocator' part > which is like below: > > static inline > struct page *rmqueue( > ... > do { > page = NULL; > if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER) { > page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); > if (page) > trace_mm_page_alloc_zone_locked(page, order, migratetype); > } > if (!page) > page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype); > } while (page && check_new_pages(page, order)); > > check_new_pages() returns true if the page taken from free list has > a hwpoison page so that the allocator iterates another round to get > another page. > > There's no function that can be called from outside allocator to remove > a page in allocator. So actual page removal is done at allocation time, > not at error handling time. That's the reason why we need PageHWPoison. hwpoison is an internal mm functionality so why cannot we simply add a function that would do that? I find the PageHWPoison usage here doing more complications than real good. Or am I missing something? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-19 7:15 ` Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-19 8:08 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-19 8:27 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-19 8:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 09:15:16AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 19-07-18 06:19:45, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Wed 18-07-18 00:55:29, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:27:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > On Tue 17-07-18 14:32:31, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > > > There's a race condition between soft offline and hugetlb_fault which > > > > > > causes unexpected process killing and/or hugetlb allocation failure. > > > > > > > > > > > > The process killing is caused by the following flow: > > > > > > > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU 2 > > > > > > > > > > > > soft offline > > > > > > get_any_page > > > > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > > > > page fault > > > > > > ... > > > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > > > alloc_huge_page > > > > > > // succeed > > > > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > > > > mmap the hugetlb file > > > > > > page fault > > > > > > ... > > > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > > > find_lock_page > > > > > > return VM_FAULT_HWPOISON > > > > > > mm_fault_error > > > > > > do_sigbus > > > > > > // kill the process > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The hugetlb allocation failure comes from the following flow: > > > > > > > > > > > > CPU 0 CPU 1 > > > > > > > > > > > > mmap a hugetlb file > > > > > > // reserve all free page but don't fault-in > > > > > > soft offline > > > > > > get_any_page > > > > > > // find the hugetlb is free > > > > > > soft_offline_free_page > > > > > > // set hwpoison flag > > > > > > dissolve_free_huge_page > > > > > > // fail because all free hugepages are reserved > > > > > > page fault > > > > > > ... > > > > > > hugetlb_fault > > > > > > hugetlb_no_page > > > > > > alloc_huge_page > > > > > > ... > > > > > > dequeue_huge_page_node_exact > > > > > > // ignore hwpoisoned hugepage > > > > > > // and finally fail due to no-mem > > > > > > > > > > > > The root cause of this is that current soft-offline code is written > > > > > > based on an assumption that PageHWPoison flag should beset at first to > > > > > > avoid accessing the corrupted data. This makes sense for memory_failure() > > > > > > or hard offline, but does not for soft offline because soft offline is > > > > > > about corrected (not uncorrected) error and is safe from data lost. > > > > > > This patch changes soft offline semantics where it sets PageHWPoison flag > > > > > > only after containment of the error page completes successfully. > > > > > > > > > > Could you please expand on the worklow here please? The code is really > > > > > hard to grasp. I must be missing something because the thing shouldn't > > > > > be really complicated. Either the page is in the free pool and you just > > > > > remove it from the allocator (with hugetlb asking for a new hugeltb page > > > > > to guaratee reserves) or it is used and you just migrate the content to > > > > > a new page (again with the hugetlb reserves consideration). Why should > > > > > PageHWPoison flag ordering make any relevance? > > > > > > > > (Considering soft offlining free hugepage,) > > > > PageHWPoison is set at first before this patch, which is racy with > > > > hugetlb fault code because it's not protected by hugetlb_lock. > > > > > > > > Originally this was written in the similar manner as hard-offline, where > > > > the race is accepted and a PageHWPoison flag is set as soon as possible. > > > > But actually that's found not necessary/correct because soft offline is > > > > supposed to be less aggressive and failure is OK. > > > > > > OK > > > > > > > So this patch is suggesting to make soft-offline less aggressive by > > > > moving SetPageHWPoison into the lock. > > > > > > I guess I still do not understand why we should even care about the > > > ordering of the HWPoison flag setting. Why cannot we simply have the > > > following code flow? Or maybe we are doing that already I just do not > > > follow the code > > > > > > soft_offline > > > check page_count > > > - free - normal page - remove from the allocator > > > - hugetlb - allocate a new hugetlb page && remove from the pool > > > - used - migrate to a new page && never release the old one > > > > > > Why do we even need HWPoison flag here? Everything can be completely > > > transparent to the application. It shouldn't fail from what I > > > understood. > > > > PageHWPoison flag is used to the 'remove from the allocator' part > > which is like below: > > > > static inline > > struct page *rmqueue( > > ... > > do { > > page = NULL; > > if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER) { > > page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); > > if (page) > > trace_mm_page_alloc_zone_locked(page, order, migratetype); > > } > > if (!page) > > page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype); > > } while (page && check_new_pages(page, order)); > > > > check_new_pages() returns true if the page taken from free list has > > a hwpoison page so that the allocator iterates another round to get > > another page. > > > > There's no function that can be called from outside allocator to remove > > a page in allocator. So actual page removal is done at allocation time, > > not at error handling time. That's the reason why we need PageHWPoison. > > hwpoison is an internal mm functionality so why cannot we simply add a > function that would do that? That's one possible solution. I know about another downside in current implementation. If a hwpoison page is found during high order page allocation, all 2^order pages (not only hwpoison page) are removed from buddy because of the above quoted code. And these leaked pages are never returned to freelist even with unpoison_memory(). If we have a page removal function which properly splits high order free pages into lower order pages, this problem is avoided. OTOH PageHWPoison still has a role to report error to userspace. Without it unpoison_memory() doesn't work. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi > I find the PageHWPoison usage here doing > more complications than real good. Or am I missing something? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-19 8:08 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-19 8:27 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-19 9:22 ` Naoya Horiguchi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-19 8:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Thu 19-07-18 08:08:05, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 09:15:16AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 19-07-18 06:19:45, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > > > Why do we even need HWPoison flag here? Everything can be completely > > > > transparent to the application. It shouldn't fail from what I > > > > understood. > > > > > > PageHWPoison flag is used to the 'remove from the allocator' part > > > which is like below: > > > > > > static inline > > > struct page *rmqueue( > > > ... > > > do { > > > page = NULL; > > > if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER) { > > > page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); > > > if (page) > > > trace_mm_page_alloc_zone_locked(page, order, migratetype); > > > } > > > if (!page) > > > page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype); > > > } while (page && check_new_pages(page, order)); > > > > > > check_new_pages() returns true if the page taken from free list has > > > a hwpoison page so that the allocator iterates another round to get > > > another page. > > > > > > There's no function that can be called from outside allocator to remove > > > a page in allocator. So actual page removal is done at allocation time, > > > not at error handling time. That's the reason why we need PageHWPoison. > > > > hwpoison is an internal mm functionality so why cannot we simply add a > > function that would do that? > > That's one possible solution. I would prefer that much more than add an overhead (albeit small) into the page allocator directly. HWPoison should be a really rare event so why should everybody pay the price? I would much rather see that the poison path pays the additional price. > I know about another downside in current implementation. > If a hwpoison page is found during high order page allocation, > all 2^order pages (not only hwpoison page) are removed from > buddy because of the above quoted code. And these leaked pages > are never returned to freelist even with unpoison_memory(). > If we have a page removal function which properly splits high order > free pages into lower order pages, this problem is avoided. Even more reason to move to a new scheme. > OTOH PageHWPoison still has a role to report error to userspace. > Without it unpoison_memory() doesn't work. Sure but we do not really need a special page flag for that. We know the page is not reachable other than via pfn walkers. If you make the page reserved and note the fact it has been poisoned in the past then you can emulate the missing functionality. Btw. do we really need unpoisoning functionality? Who is really using it, other than some tests? How does the memory become OK again? Don't we really need to go through physical hotremove & hotadd to clean the poison status? Thanks! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-19 8:27 ` Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-19 9:22 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-19 10:32 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-19 9:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:27:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 19-07-18 08:08:05, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 09:15:16AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Thu 19-07-18 06:19:45, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] > > > > > Why do we even need HWPoison flag here? Everything can be completely > > > > > transparent to the application. It shouldn't fail from what I > > > > > understood. > > > > > > > > PageHWPoison flag is used to the 'remove from the allocator' part > > > > which is like below: > > > > > > > > static inline > > > > struct page *rmqueue( > > > > ... > > > > do { > > > > page = NULL; > > > > if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER) { > > > > page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); > > > > if (page) > > > > trace_mm_page_alloc_zone_locked(page, order, migratetype); > > > > } > > > > if (!page) > > > > page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype); > > > > } while (page && check_new_pages(page, order)); > > > > > > > > check_new_pages() returns true if the page taken from free list has > > > > a hwpoison page so that the allocator iterates another round to get > > > > another page. > > > > > > > > There's no function that can be called from outside allocator to remove > > > > a page in allocator. So actual page removal is done at allocation time, > > > > not at error handling time. That's the reason why we need PageHWPoison. > > > > > > hwpoison is an internal mm functionality so why cannot we simply add a > > > function that would do that? > > > > That's one possible solution. > > I would prefer that much more than add an overhead (albeit small) into > the page allocator directly. HWPoison should be a really rare event so > why should everybody pay the price? I would much rather see that the > poison path pays the additional price. Yes, that's more maintainable. > > > I know about another downside in current implementation. > > If a hwpoison page is found during high order page allocation, > > all 2^order pages (not only hwpoison page) are removed from > > buddy because of the above quoted code. And these leaked pages > > are never returned to freelist even with unpoison_memory(). > > If we have a page removal function which properly splits high order > > free pages into lower order pages, this problem is avoided. > > Even more reason to move to a new scheme. > > > OTOH PageHWPoison still has a role to report error to userspace. > > Without it unpoison_memory() doesn't work. > > Sure but we do not really need a special page flag for that. We know the > page is not reachable other than via pfn walkers. If you make the page > reserved and note the fact it has been poisoned in the past then you can > emulate the missing functionality. > > Btw. do we really need unpoisoning functionality? Who is really using > it, other than some tests? None, as long as I know. > How does the memory become OK again? For hard-offlined in-use pages which are assumed to be pinned, we clear the PageHWPoison flag and unpin the page to return it to buddy. For other cases, we simply clear the PageHWPoison flag. Unless the page is checked by check_new_pages() before unpoison, the page is reusable. Sometimes error handling fails and the error page might turn into unexpected state (like additional refcount/mapcount). Unpoison just fails on such pages. > Don't we > really need to go through physical hotremove & hotadd to clean the > poison status? hotremove/hotadd can be a user of unpoison, but I think simply reinitializing struct pages is easiler. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages 2018-07-19 9:22 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-19 10:32 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-07-19 10:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On Thu 19-07-18 09:22:47, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:27:43AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 19-07-18 08:08:05, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 09:15:16AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Thu 19-07-18 06:19:45, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > Why do we even need HWPoison flag here? Everything can be completely > > > > > > transparent to the application. It shouldn't fail from what I > > > > > > understood. > > > > > > > > > > PageHWPoison flag is used to the 'remove from the allocator' part > > > > > which is like below: > > > > > > > > > > static inline > > > > > struct page *rmqueue( > > > > > ... > > > > > do { > > > > > page = NULL; > > > > > if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER) { > > > > > page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); > > > > > if (page) > > > > > trace_mm_page_alloc_zone_locked(page, order, migratetype); > > > > > } > > > > > if (!page) > > > > > page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype); > > > > > } while (page && check_new_pages(page, order)); > > > > > > > > > > check_new_pages() returns true if the page taken from free list has > > > > > a hwpoison page so that the allocator iterates another round to get > > > > > another page. > > > > > > > > > > There's no function that can be called from outside allocator to remove > > > > > a page in allocator. So actual page removal is done at allocation time, > > > > > not at error handling time. That's the reason why we need PageHWPoison. > > > > > > > > hwpoison is an internal mm functionality so why cannot we simply add a > > > > function that would do that? > > > > > > That's one possible solution. > > > > I would prefer that much more than add an overhead (albeit small) into > > the page allocator directly. HWPoison should be a really rare event so > > why should everybody pay the price? I would much rather see that the > > poison path pays the additional price. > > Yes, that's more maintainable. > > > > > > I know about another downside in current implementation. > > > If a hwpoison page is found during high order page allocation, > > > all 2^order pages (not only hwpoison page) are removed from > > > buddy because of the above quoted code. And these leaked pages > > > are never returned to freelist even with unpoison_memory(). > > > If we have a page removal function which properly splits high order > > > free pages into lower order pages, this problem is avoided. > > > > Even more reason to move to a new scheme. > > > > > OTOH PageHWPoison still has a role to report error to userspace. > > > Without it unpoison_memory() doesn't work. > > > > Sure but we do not really need a special page flag for that. We know the > > page is not reachable other than via pfn walkers. If you make the page > > reserved and note the fact it has been poisoned in the past then you can > > emulate the missing functionality. > > > > Btw. do we really need unpoisoning functionality? Who is really using > > it, other than some tests? > > None, as long as I know. Then why do we keep it? > > How does the memory become OK again? > > For hard-offlined in-use pages which are assumed to be pinned, > we clear the PageHWPoison flag and unpin the page to return it to buddy. > For other cases, we simply clear the PageHWPoison flag. > Unless the page is checked by check_new_pages() before unpoison, > the page is reusable. No I mean how does the memory becomes OK again. Is there any in place repair technique? > Sometimes error handling fails and the error page might turn into > unexpected state (like additional refcount/mapcount). > Unpoison just fails on such pages. > > > Don't we > > really need to go through physical hotremove & hotadd to clean the > > poison status? > > hotremove/hotadd can be a user of unpoison, but I think simply > reinitializing struct pages is easiler. Sure, that is what I meant actually. I do not really see any way to make the memory OK again other than to replace the faulty dimm and put it back online. The state is not really preserved for that so having a sticky struct page state doesn't make much sense. So from what I understood, we only need to track the poison state just allow to hotremove that memory and do not stumble over an unexpected page or try to do something with it. All other actions can be done synchronously (migrate vs. kill users). -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: soft-offline: close the race against page allocation 2018-07-17 5:32 [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-17 5:32 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-08-15 22:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix " Andrew Morton 2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-07-17 5:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-mm Cc: Michal Hocko, Andrew Morton, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel A process can be killed with SIGBUS(BUS_MCEERR_AR) when it tries to allocate a page that was just freed on the way of soft-offline. This is undesirable because soft-offline (which is about corrected error) is less aggressive than hard-offline (which is about uncorrected error), and we can make soft-offline fail and keep using the page for good reason like "system is busy." Two main changes of this patch are: - setting migrate type of the target page to MIGRATE_ISOLATE. As done in free_unref_page_commit(), this makes kernel bypass pcplist when freeing the page. So we can assume that the page is in freelist just after put_page() returns, - setting PG_hwpoison on free page under zone->lock which protects freelists, so this allows us to avoid setting PG_hwpoison on a page that is decided to be allocated soon. Reported-by: Xishi Qiu <xishi.qiuxishi@alibaba-inc.com> Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> --- changelog v1->v2: - updated comment on set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(). --- include/linux/page-flags.h | 5 +++++ include/linux/swapops.h | 10 ---------- mm/memory-failure.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ mm/migrate.c | 9 --------- mm/page_alloc.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/include/linux/page-flags.h v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/include/linux/page-flags.h index 901943e..74bee8c 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/include/linux/page-flags.h +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/include/linux/page-flags.h @@ -369,8 +369,13 @@ PAGEFLAG_FALSE(Uncached) PAGEFLAG(HWPoison, hwpoison, PF_ANY) TESTSCFLAG(HWPoison, hwpoison, PF_ANY) #define __PG_HWPOISON (1UL << PG_hwpoison) +extern bool set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(struct page *page); #else PAGEFLAG_FALSE(HWPoison) +static inline bool set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(struct page *page) +{ + return 0; +} #define __PG_HWPOISON 0 #endif diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/include/linux/swapops.h v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/include/linux/swapops.h index 9c0eb4d..fe8e08b 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/include/linux/swapops.h +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/include/linux/swapops.h @@ -335,11 +335,6 @@ static inline int is_hwpoison_entry(swp_entry_t entry) return swp_type(entry) == SWP_HWPOISON; } -static inline bool test_set_page_hwpoison(struct page *page) -{ - return TestSetPageHWPoison(page); -} - static inline void num_poisoned_pages_inc(void) { atomic_long_inc(&num_poisoned_pages); @@ -362,11 +357,6 @@ static inline int is_hwpoison_entry(swp_entry_t swp) return 0; } -static inline bool test_set_page_hwpoison(struct page *page) -{ - return false; -} - static inline void num_poisoned_pages_inc(void) { } diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c index 9b77f85..936d0e7 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/memory-failure.c +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/memory-failure.c @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ #include <linux/mm_inline.h> #include <linux/kfifo.h> #include <linux/ratelimit.h> +#include <linux/page-isolation.h> #include "internal.h" #include "ras/ras_event.h" @@ -1609,8 +1610,10 @@ static int soft_offline_huge_page(struct page *page, int flags) */ ret = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); if (!ret) { - if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) + if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) num_poisoned_pages_inc(); + else + ret = -EBUSY; } } return ret; @@ -1688,6 +1691,11 @@ static int __soft_offline_page(struct page *page, int flags) pfn, ret, page->flags, &page->flags); if (ret > 0) ret = -EIO; + } else { + if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) + num_poisoned_pages_inc(); + else + ret = -EBUSY; } } else { pr_info("soft offline: %#lx: isolation failed: %d, page count %d, type %lx (%pGp)\n", @@ -1699,6 +1707,7 @@ static int __soft_offline_page(struct page *page, int flags) static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page, int flags) { int ret; + int mt; struct page *hpage = compound_head(page); if (!PageHuge(page) && PageTransHuge(hpage)) { @@ -1717,23 +1726,37 @@ static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page, int flags) put_hwpoison_page(hpage); } + /* + * Setting MIGRATE_ISOLATE here ensures that the page will be linked + * to free list immediately (not via pcplist) when released after + * successful page migration. Otherwise we can't guarantee that the + * page is really free after put_page() returns, so + * set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() highly likely fails. + */ + mt = get_pageblock_migratetype(page); + set_pageblock_migratetype(page, MIGRATE_ISOLATE); if (PageHuge(page)) ret = soft_offline_huge_page(page, flags); else ret = __soft_offline_page(page, flags); - + set_pageblock_migratetype(page, mt); return ret; } -static void soft_offline_free_page(struct page *page) +static int soft_offline_free_page(struct page *page) { int rc = 0; struct page *head = compound_head(page); if (PageHuge(head)) rc = dissolve_free_huge_page(page); - if (!rc && !TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) - num_poisoned_pages_inc(); + if (!rc) { + if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) + num_poisoned_pages_inc(); + else + rc = -EBUSY; + } + return rc; } /** @@ -1777,7 +1800,7 @@ int soft_offline_page(struct page *page, int flags) if (ret > 0) ret = soft_offline_in_use_page(page, flags); else if (ret == 0) - soft_offline_free_page(page); + ret = soft_offline_free_page(page); return ret; } diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c index 3ae213b..4fd0fe0 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/migrate.c +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/migrate.c @@ -1193,15 +1193,6 @@ static ICE_noinline int unmap_and_move(new_page_t get_new_page, */ if (rc == MIGRATEPAGE_SUCCESS) { put_page(page); - if (reason == MR_MEMORY_FAILURE) { - /* - * Set PG_HWPoison on just freed page - * intentionally. Although it's rather weird, - * it's how HWPoison flag works at the moment. - */ - if (!test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) - num_poisoned_pages_inc(); - } } else { if (rc != -EAGAIN) { if (likely(!__PageMovable(page))) { diff --git v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/page_alloc.c v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/page_alloc.c index 607deff..4058b7e 100644 --- v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50/mm/page_alloc.c +++ v4.18-rc4-mmotm-2018-07-10-16-50_patched/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -8027,3 +8027,33 @@ bool is_free_buddy_page(struct page *page) return order < MAX_ORDER; } + +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE +/* + * Set PG_hwpoison flag if a given page is confirmed to be a free page. This + * test is performed under the zone lock to prevent a race against page + * allocation. + */ +bool set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(struct page *page) +{ + struct zone *zone = page_zone(page); + unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page); + unsigned long flags; + unsigned int order; + bool hwpoisoned = false; + + spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags); + for (order = 0; order < MAX_ORDER; order++) { + struct page *page_head = page - (pfn & ((1 << order) - 1)); + + if (PageBuddy(page_head) && page_order(page_head) >= order) { + if (!TestSetPageHWPoison(page)) + hwpoisoned = true; + break; + } + } + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags); + + return hwpoisoned; +} +#endif -- 2.7.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation 2018-07-17 5:32 [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: soft-offline: close the race against page allocation Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-08-15 22:43 ` Andrew Morton 2018-08-22 1:37 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2018-08-15 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: linux-mm, Michal Hocko, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel, Mike Kravetz On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:32:30 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> wrote: > I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks: > > - updated comments (from Andrew), > - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, > which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), > - lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied. > > > mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page': > > >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function > > 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'? > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > is_free_buddy_page > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it > in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/ > will fix this. > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968 > Quite a bit of discussion on these two, but no actual acks or review-by's? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation 2018-08-15 22:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix " Andrew Morton @ 2018-08-22 1:37 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-08-22 2:25 ` Mike Kravetz 2018-08-22 8:00 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-08-22 1:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm, Michal Hocko, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel, Mike Kravetz On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 03:43:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:32:30 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> wrote: > > > I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks: > > > > - updated comments (from Andrew), > > - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, > > which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), > > - lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied. > > > > > mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page': > > > >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function > > > 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'? > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > is_free_buddy_page > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > > > set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it > > in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/ > > will fix this. > > > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968 > > > > Quite a bit of discussion on these two, but no actual acks or > review-by's? Really sorry for late response. Xishi provided feedback on previous version, but no final ack/reviewed-by. This fix should work on the reported issue, but rewriting soft-offlining without PageHWPoison flag would be the better fix (no actual patch yet.) I'm not sure this patch should go to mainline immediately. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation 2018-08-22 1:37 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-08-22 2:25 ` Mike Kravetz 2018-08-22 8:00 ` Michal Hocko 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Mike Kravetz @ 2018-08-22 2:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi, Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm, Michal Hocko, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel On 08/21/2018 06:37 PM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 03:43:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:32:30 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> wrote: >> >>> I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks: >>> >>> - updated comments (from Andrew), >>> - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, >>> which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), >>> - lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied. >>> >>> > mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page': >>> > >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function >>> > 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'? >>> > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >>> > if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) >>> > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> > is_free_buddy_page >>> > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors >>> >>> set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it >>> in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/ >>> will fix this. >>> >>> v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968 >>> >> >> Quite a bit of discussion on these two, but no actual acks or >> review-by's? > > Really sorry for late response. > Xishi provided feedback on previous version, but no final ack/reviewed-by. > This fix should work on the reported issue, but rewriting soft-offlining > without PageHWPoison flag would be the better fix (no actual patch yet.) > I'm not sure this patch should go to mainline immediately. FWIW - The 'migration of huge PMD shared pages' issue I am working was originally triggered via soft-offline. While working the issue, I tried to exercise huge page soft-offline really hard to recreate the issue and validate a fix. However, I was more likely to hit the soft-offline race(s) your patches address. Therefore, I applied your patches to focus my testing and validation on the migration of huge PMD shared pages issue. That is sort of a Tested-by :). Just wanted to point out that it was pretty easy to hit this issue. It was easier than the issue I am working. And, the issue I am trying to address was seen in a real customer environment. So, I would not be surprised to see this issue in real customer environments as well. If you (or others) think we should go forward with these patches, I can spend some time doing a review. Already did a 'quick look' some time back. -- Mike Kravetz ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation 2018-08-22 1:37 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-08-22 2:25 ` Mike Kravetz @ 2018-08-22 8:00 ` Michal Hocko 2018-10-26 8:46 ` Michal Hocko 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-08-22 8:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel, Mike Kravetz On Wed 22-08-18 01:37:48, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 03:43:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:32:30 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> wrote: > > > > > I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks: > > > > > > - updated comments (from Andrew), > > > - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, > > > which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), > > > - lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied. > > > > > > > mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page': > > > > >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function > > > > 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'? > > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > is_free_buddy_page > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > > > > > set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it > > > in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/ > > > will fix this. > > > > > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968 > > > > > > > Quite a bit of discussion on these two, but no actual acks or > > review-by's? > > Really sorry for late response. > Xishi provided feedback on previous version, but no final ack/reviewed-by. > This fix should work on the reported issue, but rewriting soft-offlining > without PageHWPoison flag would be the better fix (no actual patch yet.) If we can go with the later the I would obviously prefer that. I cannot promise to work on the patch though. I can help with reviewing of course. If this is important enough that people are hitting the issue in normal workloads then sure, let's go with the simple fix and continue on top of that. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation 2018-08-22 8:00 ` Michal Hocko @ 2018-10-26 8:46 ` Michal Hocko 2018-10-30 6:54 ` Naoya Horiguchi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-10-26 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel, Mike Kravetz On Wed 22-08-18 10:00:25, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 22-08-18 01:37:48, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 03:43:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:32:30 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks: > > > > > > > > - updated comments (from Andrew), > > > > - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, > > > > which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), > > > > - lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied. > > > > > > > > > mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page': > > > > > >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function > > > > > 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'? > > > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > > if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) > > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > is_free_buddy_page > > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > > > > > > > set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it > > > > in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/ > > > > will fix this. > > > > > > > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968 > > > > > > > > > > Quite a bit of discussion on these two, but no actual acks or > > > review-by's? > > > > Really sorry for late response. > > Xishi provided feedback on previous version, but no final ack/reviewed-by. > > This fix should work on the reported issue, but rewriting soft-offlining > > without PageHWPoison flag would be the better fix (no actual patch yet.) > > If we can go with the later the I would obviously prefer that. I cannot > promise to work on the patch though. I can help with reviewing of > course. > > If this is important enough that people are hitting the issue in normal > workloads then sure, let's go with the simple fix and continue on top of > that. Naoya, did you have any chance to look at this or have any plans to look? I am willing to review and help with the overal design but I cannot really promise to work on the code. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation 2018-10-26 8:46 ` Michal Hocko @ 2018-10-30 6:54 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-10-30 8:16 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-10-30 6:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel, Mike Kravetz On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 10:46:36AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 22-08-18 10:00:25, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 22-08-18 01:37:48, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 03:43:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:32:30 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks: > > > > > > > > > > - updated comments (from Andrew), > > > > > - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, > > > > > which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), > > > > > - lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied. > > > > > > > > > > > mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page': > > > > > > >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function > > > > > > 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'? > > > > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > > > if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) > > > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > is_free_buddy_page > > > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > > > > > > > > > set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it > > > > > in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/ > > > > > will fix this. > > > > > > > > > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968 > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quite a bit of discussion on these two, but no actual acks or > > > > review-by's? > > > > > > Really sorry for late response. > > > Xishi provided feedback on previous version, but no final ack/reviewed-by. > > > This fix should work on the reported issue, but rewriting soft-offlining > > > without PageHWPoison flag would be the better fix (no actual patch yet.) > > > > If we can go with the later the I would obviously prefer that. I cannot > > promise to work on the patch though. I can help with reviewing of > > course. > > > > If this is important enough that people are hitting the issue in normal > > workloads then sure, let's go with the simple fix and continue on top of > > that. > > Naoya, did you have any chance to look at this or have any plans to look? > I am willing to review and help with the overal design but I cannot > really promise to work on the code. I have a draft version of a patch to isolate a page in buddy-friendly manner without PageHWPoison flag (that was written weeks ago, but I couldn't finish because my other project interrupted me ...). I'll post it after testing, especially confirming that hotplug code properly reset the isolated page. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation 2018-10-30 6:54 ` Naoya Horiguchi @ 2018-10-30 8:16 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2018-10-30 8:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naoya Horiguchi Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, xishi.qiuxishi, zy.zhengyi, linux-kernel, Mike Kravetz On Tue 30-10-18 06:54:33, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 10:46:36AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 22-08-18 10:00:25, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Wed 22-08-18 01:37:48, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 03:43:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:32:30 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I've updated the patchset based on feedbacks: > > > > > > > > > > > > - updated comments (from Andrew), > > > > > > - moved calling set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() from mm/migrate.c to mm/memory-failure.c, > > > > > > which is necessary to check the return code of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), > > > > > > - lkp bot reported a build error when only 1/2 is applied. > > > > > > > > > > > > > mm/memory-failure.c: In function 'soft_offline_huge_page': > > > > > > > >> mm/memory-failure.c:1610:8: error: implicit declaration of function > > > > > > > 'set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page'; did you mean 'is_free_buddy_page'? > > > > > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > > > > if (set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(page)) > > > > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > is_free_buddy_page > > > > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > > > > > > > > > > > set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is defined in 2/2, so we can't use it > > > > > > in 1/2. Simply doing s/set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page/!TestSetPageHWPoison/ > > > > > > will fix this. > > > > > > > > > > > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/968 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quite a bit of discussion on these two, but no actual acks or > > > > > review-by's? > > > > > > > > Really sorry for late response. > > > > Xishi provided feedback on previous version, but no final ack/reviewed-by. > > > > This fix should work on the reported issue, but rewriting soft-offlining > > > > without PageHWPoison flag would be the better fix (no actual patch yet.) > > > > > > If we can go with the later the I would obviously prefer that. I cannot > > > promise to work on the patch though. I can help with reviewing of > > > course. > > > > > > If this is important enough that people are hitting the issue in normal > > > workloads then sure, let's go with the simple fix and continue on top of > > > that. > > > > Naoya, did you have any chance to look at this or have any plans to look? > > I am willing to review and help with the overal design but I cannot > > really promise to work on the code. > > I have a draft version of a patch to isolate a page in buddy-friendly manner > without PageHWPoison flag (that was written weeks ago, but I couldn't finish > because my other project interrupted me ...). > I'll post it after testing, especially confirming that hotplug code properly > reset the isolated page. Thanks a lot Naoya. It is highly appreciated! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-10-30 8:16 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2018-07-17 5:32 [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix race against page allocation Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: fix race on soft-offlining free huge pages Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-17 14:27 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-17 20:10 ` Mike Kravetz 2018-07-18 1:28 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 2:36 ` Mike Kravetz 2018-07-18 0:55 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 1:41 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-18 8:50 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-19 6:19 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-19 7:15 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-19 8:08 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-19 8:27 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-19 9:22 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-07-19 10:32 ` Michal Hocko 2018-07-17 5:32 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: soft-offline: close the race against page allocation Naoya Horiguchi 2018-08-15 22:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: soft-offline: fix " Andrew Morton 2018-08-22 1:37 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-08-22 2:25 ` Mike Kravetz 2018-08-22 8:00 ` Michal Hocko 2018-10-26 8:46 ` Michal Hocko 2018-10-30 6:54 ` Naoya Horiguchi 2018-10-30 8:16 ` Michal Hocko
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).