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, 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 70694C47095 for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 17:27:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B702168B for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 17:27:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728419AbgJGR1G (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Oct 2020 13:27:06 -0400 Received: from mga18.intel.com ([134.134.136.126]:65154 "EHLO mga18.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726348AbgJGR1F (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Oct 2020 13:27:05 -0400 IronPort-SDR: 4pLhHfNa/D5HQTuPPhBLz9MsQOiBhuGBcDURjqqkDHVdULDOtcrLEM35cP2/jYD6IXDu5cdukp cihGbpZOWZcw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9767"; a="152821023" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,347,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="152821023" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Oct 2020 10:26:08 -0700 IronPort-SDR: YQKUNORNy8VrI5cpc8I3z1JS+pfk6A7ydbG3DSW5FaMtMCcLFgcmFOJsE8Kjnmudm1WFnYtFQl 7N5jQsYVh2cQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,347,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="461416722" Received: from dumser-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.252.51.100]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Oct 2020 10:25:55 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:25:51 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Haitao Huang Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Jethro Beekman , Jordan Hand , Nathaniel McCallum , Chunyang Hui , Seth Moore , Sean Christopherson , akpm@linux-foundation.org, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, asapek@google.com, bp@alien8.de, cedric.xing@intel.com, chenalexchen@google.com, conradparker@google.com, cyhanish@google.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, kai.huang@intel.com, kai.svahn@intel.com, kmoy@google.com, ludloff@google.com, luto@kernel.org, nhorman@redhat.com, puiterwijk@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de, yaozhangx@google.com, mikko.ylinen@intel.com, willy@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v39 16/24] x86/sgx: Add a page reclaimer Message-ID: <20201007172551.GA4792@linux.intel.com> References: <20201003045059.665934-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20201003045059.665934-17-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20201003133245.GA6074@linux.intel.com> <20201004223921.GA48517@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201004223921.GA48517@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 01:39:21AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 01:23:49PM -0500, Haitao Huang wrote: > > On Sat, 03 Oct 2020 08:32:45 -0500, Jarkko Sakkinen > > wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 12:22:47AM -0500, Haitao Huang wrote: > > > > When I turn on CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, kernel reports following > > > > suspicious RCU > > > > usages. Not sure if it is an issue. Just reporting here: > > > > > > I'm glad to hear that my tip helped you to get us the data. > > > > > > This does not look like an issue in the page reclaimer, which was not > > > obvious for me before. That's a good thing. I was really worried about > > > that because it has been very stable for a long period now. The last > > > bug fix for the reclaimer was done in June in v31 version of the patch > > > set and after that it has been unchanged (except possibly some renames > > > requested by Boris). > > > > > > I wildly guess I have a bad usage pattern for xarray. I migrated to it > > > in v36, and it is entirely possible that I've misused it. It was the > > > first time that I ever used it. Before xarray we had radix_tree but > > > based Matthew Wilcox feedback I did a migration to xarray. > > > > > > What I'd ask you to do next is to, if by any means possible, to try to > > > run the same test with v35 so we can verify this. That one still has > > > the radix tree. > > > > > > > > > v35 does not cause any such warning messages from kernel > > Thank you. Looks like Matthew already located the issue, a fix will > land soon. Just acknowledging that this should be fixed in my master branch now. /Jarkko