linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc: fabecassis@nvidia.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com, mhocko@suse.com,
	cl@linux.com, vbabka@suse.cz, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] mm: move_pages: return valid node id in status if the page is already on the target node
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:39:25 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a16b53f9-92c9-ff01-06c1-530647ecaff1@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9E51ECF6-E9E8-4772-B7D8-7E528DD56A89@lca.pw>



On 12/5/19 1:42 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
>
>> On Dec 4, 2019, at 11:21 PM, Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>>
>> Felix Abecassis reports move_pages() would return random status if the
>> pages are already on the target node by the below test program:
>>
>> ---8<---
>>
>> int main(void)
>> {
>>     const long node_id = 1;
>>     const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>>     const int64_t num_pages = 8;
>>
>>     unsigned long nodemask =  1 << node_id;
>>     long ret = set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nodemask, sizeof(nodemask));
>>     if (ret < 0)
>>         return (EXIT_FAILURE);
>>
>>     void **pages = malloc(sizeof(void*) * num_pages);
>>     for (int i = 0; i < num_pages; ++i) {
>>         pages[i] = mmap(NULL, page_size, PROT_WRITE | PROT_READ,
>>                 MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_POPULATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS,
>>                 -1, 0);
>>         if (pages[i] == MAP_FAILED)
>>             return (EXIT_FAILURE);
>>     }
>>
>>     ret = set_mempolicy(MPOL_DEFAULT, NULL, 0);
>>     if (ret < 0)
>>         return (EXIT_FAILURE);
>>
>>     int *nodes = malloc(sizeof(int) * num_pages);
>>     int *status = malloc(sizeof(int) * num_pages);
>>     for (int i = 0; i < num_pages; ++i) {
>>         nodes[i] = node_id;
>>         status[i] = 0xd0; /* simulate garbage values */
>>     }
>>
>>     ret = move_pages(0, num_pages, pages, nodes, status, MPOL_MF_MOVE);
>>     printf("move_pages: %ld\n", ret);
>>     for (int i = 0; i < num_pages; ++i)
>>         printf("status[%d] = %d\n", i, status[i]);
>> }
>> ---8<---
>>
>> Then running the program would return nonsense status values:
>> $ ./move_pages_bug
>> move_pages: 0
>> status[0] = 208
>> status[1] = 208
>> status[2] = 208
>> status[3] = 208
>> status[4] = 208
>> status[5] = 208
>> status[6] = 208
>> status[7] = 208
>>
>> This is because the status is not set if the page is already on the
>> target node, but move_pages() should return valid status as long as it
>> succeeds.  The valid status may be errno or node id.
>>
>> We can't simply initialize status array to zero since the pages may be
>> not on node 0.  Fix it by updating status with node id which the page is
>> already on.  And, it looks we have to update the status inside
>> add_page_for_migration() since the page struct is not available outside
>> it.
>>
>> Make add_page_for_migration() return 1 if store_status() is failed in
>> order to not mix up the status value since -EFAULT is also a valid
>> status.
> Don’t really feel it is a bug after all. As you mentioned, the manpage was rather poorly written. Why it is not a good idea just update the manpage or/and code comments instead to document the current behavior?

There are definitely a few inconsistencies, but I think the manpage is 
quite clear for this specific case, which says "status is an array of 
integers that return the status of each page. The array contains valid 
values only if move_pages() did not return an error." And, it looks 
kernel just misbehaved since 4.17 due to the fixes commit, so it sounds 
like a regression too.




  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-05 17:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-05  4:21 [v2 PATCH] mm: move_pages: return valid node id in status if the page is already on the target node Yang Shi
2019-12-05  5:44 ` John Hubbard
2019-12-05  5:50   ` John Hubbard
2019-12-05 17:20   ` Yang Shi
2019-12-05  9:42 ` Qian Cai
2019-12-05 17:39   ` Yang Shi [this message]
2019-12-05 18:11     ` Qian Cai
2019-12-05 18:17       ` Christopher Lameter
2019-12-05 11:31 ` Michal Hocko
2019-12-05 17:18   ` Yang Shi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=a16b53f9-92c9-ff01-06c1-530647ecaff1@linux.alibaba.com \
    --to=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cai@lca.pw \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=fabecassis@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).