From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Jin Dongming <jin.dongming@np.css.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>,
AKPM <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Hidetoshi Seto" <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"Huang Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
LKLM <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Fix unsuitable behavior for poisoned tail pages of THP.
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:46:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110125224635.GL926@random.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D3E63B8.4040701@np.css.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 02:46:32PM +0900, Jin Dongming wrote:
> When a tail page of THP is poisoned, memory-failure will do
> nothing except setting poison flag, while the expected behavior is
> that the process, who is using the poisoned tail page, should be
> killed.
>
> The above problem is caused by lru checking of the poisoned tail page
> of THP. Because PG_lru flag is only set on the head page of
> THP, the check always consider the poisoned tail page as NON
> lru page.
>
> So avoid checking NON lru for THP, as like as hugetlb.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jin Dongming <jin.dongming@np.css.fujitsu.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> mm/memory-failure.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 5396603..44a1bdf 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -1046,19 +1046,22 @@ int __memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int trapno, int flags)
> * The check (unnecessarily) ignores LRU pages being isolated and
> * walked by the page reclaim code, however that's not a big loss.
> */
> - if (!PageLRU(p) && !PageHuge(p))
> - shake_page(p, 0);
> - if (!PageLRU(p) && !PageHuge(p)) {
> - /*
> - * shake_page could have turned it free.
> - */
> - if (is_free_buddy_page(p)) {
> - action_result(pfn, "free buddy, 2nd try", DELAYED);
> - return 0;
> + if (!PageCompound(p)) {
Here the check could become a:
if (!PageHuge(p) && !PageTransCompound(p))
so the whole branch is optimized away at build time when both
hugetlbfs and THP are set =n (or in archs not supporting either of
those).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-25 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-25 5:46 [PATCH 3/3] Fix unsuitable behavior for poisoned tail pages of THP Jin Dongming
2011-01-25 22:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2011-01-27 0:13 ` Jin Dongming
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=20110125224635.GL926@random.random \
--to=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=jin.dongming@np.css.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox