From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f200.google.com (mail-io0-f200.google.com [209.85.223.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D756B0038 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:28:51 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-io0-f200.google.com with SMTP id e186so8813037iof.9 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 09:28:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id o73sor4515456ito.129.2018.01.18.09.28.50 for (Google Transport Security); Thu, 18 Jan 2018 09:28:50 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7B3446FC@ORSMSX110.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <201801160115.w0G1FOIG057203@www262.sakura.ne.jp> <201801170233.JDG21842.OFOJMQSHtOFFLV@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <201801172008.CHH39543.FFtMHOOVSQJLFO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <201801181712.BFD13039.LtHOSVMFJQFOFO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20180118122550.2lhsjx7hg5drcjo4@node.shutemov.name> <20180118145830.GA6406@redhat.com> <20180118165629.kpdkezarsf4qymnw@node.shutemov.name> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7B3446FC@ORSMSX110.amr.corp.intel.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 09:28:48 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [mm 4.15-rc8] Random oopses under memory pressure. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Luck, Tony" Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrea Arcangeli , Dave Hansen , Tetsuo Handa , "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "hannes@cmpxchg.org" , "iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com" , "mgorman@techsingularity.net" , "vbabka@suse.cz" , "mhocko@kernel.org" , "hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com" , "hughd@google.com" , "oleg@redhat.com" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "riel@redhat.com" , "srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "vdavydov.dev@gmail.com" , "mingo@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "x86@kernel.org" On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:26 AM, Luck, Tony wrote: >> Both are real page. But why do you expect pages to be 64-byte alinged? >> Both are aligned to 64-bit as they suppose to be IIUC. > > On a 64-bit kernel sizeof struct page == 64 (after much work by people to > trim out excess stuff). So I thought we made sure to align the base address > of blocks of "struct page" so that every one neatly fits into one cache line. The bug happens on 32-bit, and a 'struct page' is not 64-byte aligned there at all. See my other email about the explanation of why "page1 - page2" doesn't work when they aren't mutually aligned to the actual size of the 'struct page'. Linus -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org