From: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
To: Hui Zhu <hui.zhu@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>,
Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm: assert exclusive nid/zonenum bits at the page/folio access sites
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 08:46:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bfd598cd-60cc-4060-abd8-6865519e6524@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260625053958.918738-1-hui.zhu@linux.dev>
On 6/25/26 07:39, Hui Zhu wrote:
> From: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@kylinos.cn>
>
> KCSAN reports a data race between page_to_nid()/folio_pgdat() reading
> page->flags and folio_trylock()/folio_lock() concurrently doing
> test_and_set_bit_lock(PG_locked, ...) on the same word, e.g.:
>
> BUG: KCSAN: data-race in __lruvec_stat_mod_folio / shmem_get_folio_gfp
>
> The node id and zone id occupy fixed bit-ranges of page->flags that
> are set once at page init and never modified afterwards, so they can
> never overlap with the low PG_locked/PG_waiters bits touched by the
> folio lock path.
>
> ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(mdf.f, ...) inside memdesc_nid()/memdesc_zonenum()
> checks a by-value copy of the flags word, not the actual shared
> page->flags/folio->flags being modified concurrently, so it doesn't
> reliably assert anything about the real race.
Is that the case? I thought the existing ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS() reliably worked
before?
Maybe the compiler optimizing out a local copy sorted that for us.
> Move the assertion to
> page_to_nid(), folio_nid(), page_zonenum() and folio_zonenum(), where
> flags is dereferenced directly from the page/folio.
>
> On CONFIG_NUMA=n, NODES_MASK is 0 and the old memdesc_nid() body
> folded to a constant, so page->flags/folio->flags was never actually
> read. ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS() is a real runtime check that can't be
> folded away, so doing it unconditionally would add a pointless read
> of page->flags/folio->flags and a check that can never fire. Keep
> page_to_nid()/folio_nid() as plain "return 0" static inline stubs
> under CONFIG_NUMA=n instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@kylinos.cn>
> ---
> Changelog:
> v4:
> According to the comments of Andrew and Sashiko, set
> page_to_nid()/folio_nid() as static inline stubs returning 0
> under CONFIG_NUMA=n.
> v3:
> According to the comments of Andrew and Sashiko, move
> ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS out of memdesc_nid()/memdesc_zonenum()
> into the page/folio call sites.
> v2:
> According to the comments of David, remove useless comments and use
> ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS() in memdesc_nid() instead of data_race() in
> page_to_nid().
>
> include/linux/mm.h | 9 +++++++++
> include/linux/mmzone.h | 3 ++-
> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
> index 485df9c2dbdd..56b39194605a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
> @@ -2294,15 +2294,24 @@ static inline int memdesc_nid(memdesc_flags_t mdf)
> }
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> static inline int page_to_nid(const struct page *page)
> {
> + ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(PF_POISONED_CHECK(page)->flags,
> + NODES_MASK << NODES_PGSHIFT);
Performing the PF_POISONED_CHECK() twice is a bit odd. One time is sufficient,
maybe simply before both statements separately?
> return memdesc_nid(PF_POISONED_CHECK(page)->flags);
> }
>
> static inline int folio_nid(const struct folio *folio)
> {
> + ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(folio->flags,
> + NODES_MASK << NODES_PGSHIFT);
> return memdesc_nid(folio->flags);
> }
> +#else
> +#define page_to_nid(page) (0)
> +#define folio_nid(folio) (0)
> +#endif
>
LGTM
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org>
--
Cheers,
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-25 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-25 5:39 [PATCH v4] mm: assert exclusive nid/zonenum bits at the page/folio access sites Hui Zhu
2026-06-25 6:46 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) [this message]
2026-06-25 6:50 ` kernel test robot
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=bfd598cd-60cc-4060-abd8-6865519e6524@kernel.org \
--to=david@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=hui.zhu@linux.dev \
--cc=kasong@tencent.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yuanchu@google.com \
--cc=zhuhui@kylinos.cn \
/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