From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: Usama Arif <usama.arif@bytedance.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, muchun.song@linux.dev,
songmuchun@bytedance.com, fam.zheng@bytedance.com,
liangma@liangbit.com, punit.agrawal@bytedance.com,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: hugetlb: Only prep and add allocated folios for non-gigantic pages
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 17:04:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231014000450.GA253713@monkey> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231013001203.GA3812@monkey>
On 10/12/23 17:12, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 10/12/23 07:53, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> > On 10/11/23 17:03, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 06:23:45PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> > > > On 10/09/23 15:56, Usama Arif wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Nathan! That is very helpful.
> >
> > I will use this information to try and recreate. If I can recreate, I
> > should be able to get to root cause.
>
> I could easily recreate the issue using the provided instructions. First
> thing I did was add a few printk's to check/verify state. The beginning
> of gather_bootmem_prealloc looked like this:
Hi Nathan,
This is looking more and more like a Clang issue to me. I did a little
more problem isolation today. Here is what I did:
- Check out commit "hugetlb: restructure pool allocations" in linux-next
- Fix the known issue with early disable/enable IRQs via locking by
applying:
commit 266789498210dff6cf9a14b64fa3a5cb2fcc5858
Author: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Date: Fri Oct 13 13:14:15 2023 -0700
fix prep_and_add_allocated_folios locking
diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
index c843506654f8..d8ab2d9b391b 100644
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c
+++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -2246,15 +2246,16 @@ static struct folio *alloc_fresh_hugetlb_folio(struct hstate *h,
static void prep_and_add_allocated_folios(struct hstate *h,
struct list_head *folio_list)
{
+ unsigned long flags;
struct folio *folio, *tmp_f;
/* Add all new pool pages to free lists in one lock cycle */
- spin_lock_irq(&hugetlb_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&hugetlb_lock, flags);
list_for_each_entry_safe(folio, tmp_f, folio_list, lru) {
__prep_account_new_huge_page(h, folio_nid(folio));
enqueue_hugetlb_folio(h, folio);
}
- spin_unlock_irq(&hugetlb_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hugetlb_lock, flags);
}
/*
- Add the following code which would only trigger a BUG if we were to
traverse an empty list; which should NEVER happen.
diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
index d8ab2d9b391b..be234831b33f 100644
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c
+++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -3294,11 +3294,21 @@ static void __init gather_bootmem_prealloc(void)
LIST_HEAD(folio_list);
struct huge_bootmem_page *m;
struct hstate *h, *prev_h = NULL;
+ bool empty;
+
+ empty = list_empty(&huge_boot_pages);
+ if (empty)
+ printk("gather_bootmem_prealloc: huge_boot_pages list empty\n");
list_for_each_entry(m, &huge_boot_pages, list) {
struct page *page = virt_to_page(m);
struct folio *folio = (void *)page;
+ if (empty) {
+ printk(" Traversing an empty list as if not empty!!!\n");
+ BUG();
+ }
+
h = m->hstate;
/*
* It is possible to have multiple huge page sizes (hstates)
- As you have experienced, this will BUG if built with LLVM 17.0.2 and
CONFIG_INIT_STACK_NONE
- It will NOT BUG if built with LLVM 13.0.1 but will BUG if built with
LLVM llvm-14.0.6-x86_64 and later.
As mentioned in the previous email, the generated code for loop entry
looks wrong to my untrained eyes. Can you or someone on the llvm team
take a look?
--
Mike Kravetz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-14 0:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-09 14:56 [PATCH] mm: hugetlb: Only prep and add allocated folios for non-gigantic pages Usama Arif
2023-10-10 1:23 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-10-10 17:01 ` [External] " Usama Arif
2023-10-10 21:30 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-10-10 21:31 ` Konrad Dybcio
2023-10-12 0:03 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-10-12 14:53 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-10-13 0:12 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-10-14 0:04 ` Mike Kravetz [this message]
2023-10-18 20:54 ` Nick Desaulniers
2023-10-18 22:20 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-10-19 4:33 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2023-10-19 14:20 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-10-19 2:38 ` Mike Kravetz
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=20231014000450.GA253713@monkey \
--to=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fam.zheng@bytedance.com \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@linaro.org \
--cc=liangma@liangbit.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=punit.agrawal@bytedance.com \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=usama.arif@bytedance.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.