From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2379DC433E0 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 13:00:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813A52335A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 13:00:18 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 813A52335A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=bytedance.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A87B16B02DB; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 08:00:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A12348D0139; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 08:00:17 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 901628D011F; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 08:00:17 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0114.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.114]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 739FE6B02DB for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 08:00:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin04.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CFB1824556B for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 13:00:17 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77678987274.04.form05_3310a37274ea Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CDC38012B9E for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 13:00:17 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: form05_3310a37274ea X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 7535 Received: from mail-pg1-f181.google.com (mail-pg1-f181.google.com [209.85.215.181]) by imf31.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 13:00:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f181.google.com with SMTP id i5so4804367pgo.1 for ; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 05:00:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bytedance-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=biffWNQNFNPnAS5OxXR8C0hU95gWZz4zkiv6kH4IfyQ=; b=uW+09LknRIdDJjyGSlFutTR0R9O4IAwK5KjLGsgUX8fUoQJL859v8FhYDo+zjPV0IK Xil6LouHgN74ca7YygLa5VIKQRV1qt4O+PDfCJryKOaIR7yy2LfMRjetcro1reZlIAQI GxnaWMug/kpXyB8pyatoBNZzNVo1MNdiUwtdO+P2ty/nCNLRZNMxXlT3WF5rQlB6RqYw TVKc5IFdb8A5gW3GJiq2RCPQmj03eATzDqBuaOj5RDQOAIscLNn1XsziSI2w5/qbAIrh NnXCVPH+Gfv3fuHCU99+/ewKBj9O/obtAj9NxjZ8pW5UF8Xx/ZFDliYwqvrSbq+3yfj5 7JOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=biffWNQNFNPnAS5OxXR8C0hU95gWZz4zkiv6kH4IfyQ=; b=KBFFgAoto/6Q9AV5HEwJBZogdec2VEUVz5boeit5K+wFc0nyQ7Moe6xy3+YDPoIsny Uy/loG0OBL7SjqEj+xlmr0cMQBy5rqOX7Ny0s1Td5HegEq8LI8bHu91UUO8p/S4B4bp2 0tiW8PPMFmLyyzJ9LBnIIjeefsBLTHepQMJUrvTqYb8Td+eAnC/+xC4sFpVOChODVUEL F0fRdVrZcXJAiLx33TrPMQaCqot/sppTR0wbf/wlYXwMqloTQ/lKZ94gLkEyY1t+sqDb 987NqtGh5nIbwQ8b8xQY1/m78ocNKCg0Y57VKOzg1AMW1auHVJAQM3/yb0KLZMKI7LLg 1iCA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530oZ4q8gXib0IHKz0GituoQ99eaQM4e+aHeVxtzY+Wj1Fu/SQRs AcQnPIsxsr7ka2N56I1SaTvvEmqXInfZh6yR58+Usw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyNGK0J3U+p1T20Uw5syrzrHoJSEk1Qvpuz9DO5hxpZYN98Loq7WdSf63/hBT+jougnLzTt6qXg8LGzcHW/508= X-Received: by 2002:a62:4e4e:0:b029:19e:aaab:8be with SMTP id c75-20020a624e4e0000b029019eaaab08bemr8762101pfb.59.1610024415015; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 05:00:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210106084739.63318-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com> <20210106084739.63318-4-songmuchun@bytedance.com> <20210106165632.GT13207@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20210107084146.GD13207@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20210107111827.GG13207@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20210107123854.GJ13207@dhcp22.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20210107123854.GJ13207@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Muchun Song Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 20:59:33 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] mm: hugetlb: fix a race between freeing and dissolving the page To: Michal Hocko Cc: Mike Kravetz , Andrew Morton , Naoya Horiguchi , Andi Kleen , Linux Memory Management List , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 8:38 PM Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 07-01-21 19:38:00, Muchun Song wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 7:18 PM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > On Thu 07-01-21 16:53:13, Muchun Song wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 4:41 PM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu 07-01-21 13:39:38, Muchun Song wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 12:56 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed 06-01-21 16:47:36, Muchun Song wrote: > > > > > > > > There is a race condition between __free_huge_page() > > > > > > > > and dissolve_free_huge_page(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CPU0: CPU1: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > // page_count(page) == 1 > > > > > > > > put_page(page) > > > > > > > > __free_huge_page(page) > > > > > > > > dissolve_free_huge_page(page) > > > > > > > > spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock) > > > > > > > > // PageHuge(page) && !page_count(page) > > > > > > > > update_and_free_page(page) > > > > > > > > // page is freed to the buddy > > > > > > > > spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock) > > > > > > > > spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock) > > > > > > > > clear_page_huge_active(page) > > > > > > > > enqueue_huge_page(page) > > > > > > > > // It is wrong, the page is already freed > > > > > > > > spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The race windows is between put_page() and spin_lock() which > > > > > > > > is in the __free_huge_page(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The race window reall is between put_page and dissolve_free_huge_page. > > > > > > > And the result is that the put_page path would clobber an unrelated page > > > > > > > (either free or already reused page) which is quite serious. > > > > > > > Fortunatelly pages are dissolved very rarely. I believe that user would > > > > > > > require to be privileged to hit this by intention. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We should make sure that the page is already on the free list > > > > > > > > when it is dissolved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another option would be to check for PageHuge in __free_huge_page. Have > > > > > > > you considered that rather than add yet another state? The scope of the > > > > > > > spinlock would have to be extended. If that sounds more tricky then can > > > > > > > we check the page->lru in the dissolve path? If the page is still > > > > > > > PageHuge and reference count 0 then there shouldn't be many options > > > > > > > where it can be queued, right? > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you mean that we iterate over the free list to check whether > > > > > > the page is on the free list? > > > > > > > > > > No I meant to check that the page is enqueued which along with ref count > > > > > = 0 should mean it has been released to the pool unless I am missing > > > > > something. > > > > > > > > The page can be on the free list or active list or empty when it > > > > is freed to the pool. How to check whether it is on the free list? > > > > > > As I've said, I might be missing something here. But if the page is > > > freed why does it matter whether it is on a active list or free list > > > from the dissolve operation POV? > > > > As you said "check the page->lru". I have a question. > > How to check the page->lru in the dissolve path? > > list_empty? No. > > > BTW, dissolve_free_huge_page aims to free the page > > to buddy allocator. put_page (for HugeTLB page) aims > > to free the page to the hugepage pool. > > Right. Can we simply back off in the dissolving path when ref count is > 0 && PageHuge() if list_empty(page->lru)? Is there any other scenario > when the all above is true and the page is not being freed? The list_empty(&page->lru) may always return false. The page before freeing is on the active list (hstate->hugepage_activelist).Then it is on the free list after freeing. So list_empty(&page->lru) is always false. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs