From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8BA33CBE86 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2026 21:50:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782769847; cv=none; b=NUEEpFsEWAtaNU9QG3Z+82gBJHCAKKVQbZgwmgaexvo9cmPTiT/JWTyuG+6vyJQhGG6oTrgb41/yoZQrM733bhpbN8PrjPYeK+SAFIv75hDIS976BEzh0R9LvhQOHaUv7RitawuzG9hfBN3yG8Jjra/jtI9DiS8ktYdbOnaXTto= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782769847; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eMS4e+Gb+yNoZwxOY/zCsJx6umB9gFs6bTWZ5VqPw9g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=gJBcedVipsHe5mgVNdrT3j2lQjFC7ISSnDtK6ZJdfp4/zL0z31GSH7975Nw47D7Y1JUcjMc0sfKJ4vwEKHC0XZO/DouN1rpjayMLZbkqmMJw5n7vsQSPWvzX2UMQ27fRsKBkkw/rkSCjXrn4XKRbzovrL6Eg+XEeUK3yAfTEx2o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=GotYlslX; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=S01AGNaA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="GotYlslX"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="S01AGNaA" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1782769844; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=j1BSh5W1gPjYMhKd19XJgXfbVBqQZUI73y0mmOWCqSI=; b=GotYlslX03BthGAqGe3c3593m9hPUUh8/4FY2LIdSrWWfntXl4oxs3xIekm2InMa0y/WMB cgqkvqxMjUyANW9qzszX8OEmUvSYoPWGkbSZp8UkkLQo1P4w2GhDIUuNlbYxOcS7mYmmji 7Z2KCCz4TWHHEjjE0r9VFzD9nkwnaEw= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-176-ybruDLVyPcSI2mxefwEEJg-1; Mon, 29 Jun 2026 17:50:43 -0400 X-MC-Unique: ybruDLVyPcSI2mxefwEEJg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: ybruDLVyPcSI2mxefwEEJg_1782769842 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-47248bd8bc0so1467790f8f.1 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:50:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=google; t=1782769842; x=1783374642; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=j1BSh5W1gPjYMhKd19XJgXfbVBqQZUI73y0mmOWCqSI=; b=S01AGNaAWue71c+OSl3FGovgN8fGR2EiQKfm3GaVn1tbnLWxLllT5GMYzxLKFAjuVz bk22Pci9J6P+TSVy+cI1LWCDNfya+NP7BJ3NjUe3LJu5nUGtC3GiIJ9gwKBiGIbZ06se osgUVBBl5IO0Do5ZaApLJY7BJRcmno5KHXqBLgowrZ+FXs6JhFEiL7u37tlzkeuvwQMj Itp61j5z/hvmBYqg7NE2OTHbn215dQcfb7sJCbuyTZ+mcswE6j+HB6U/0gWvTzLbyPtt Dh2q9zNd4vi0Y5TepzcV9GZl5El6Ibo1cr5Alty8hmXfvKp5soE9rlO4peRKtkFfU75z sLYA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1782769842; x=1783374642; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=j1BSh5W1gPjYMhKd19XJgXfbVBqQZUI73y0mmOWCqSI=; b=bHzR73UraHhRiXhXT5lCaEc1F7O8rUpG2uZpv864BcxFCoWwFqzlXVUoUly9qQFaXB 6vVOuXkbTNLF9Q1UCkF4WGQdU5RkywlJC66riO8AcciaMYt03sHp7p4gSQ6wr3qYAsrE KhEfjpG0M9imr/iQRbi3XtH+7BbgsnQ5pQI/+2oWevCkrOxHphoAB1MwMsR0hFUPG1lW NpPzAsBsk3s1G7/J2qP0yAK1y08a4MHGRz28uQAxC9lOlDq+L/XjLRMBeoMuF/k+BVzx TeD4/F9SwcjGm1c5fM9hQeC3qtgbGNCpKw3W3DayaPgZh0MmEWzrznMY3x//ABdXKPKl 3CCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyoJn5YsLcfi4nY8Pb2K+2rM3ArbT8RKQJ3JiMvbB9cqK9vsrt/ IhWAA81sA0zr6kF3idj0P5DFcsb4NRVrbOqheYyWdClN1b1e0517vXt6ulqb8xKKtcIouYoRqEw P+pwhwrvKfKyF3JFGtV2e2K3/llUleFXurjqUvuMzMeTHkL9K41ZTb8I4W2CW2zoDcUGvS3IfPQ == X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7cnhOc3ncocpo427C0n2ZvC32FXUvfX3tClQlItUUxhNF37VCKXIZfeFB+6mXaX 5ig8HPR9iqpSVlErwKqtT+H8RE8fZ+blHVhGZCIB2aGrp3YgduqcCZPrSMthDj9W96oP1xh1d3X cAgb3kOiZtbXBuq2jlTFWDwH//PDLDvvroDsDgw1CZlWJlwm5ZrPJkH+So6At99NQWakd+LU6x+ ofE02/3tOg9/tPBhPGSifJfA/vEgsKwwKvJeozuUvt6Uo/3xHsrDEj2nBrJT1DzaeW/HR2aEI74 WFPFvQ3L8CTZTxrDbT8GEl0l3gZLR8aPPgBQeRHKLDlUU6I6tXPc1ajuPOG/BFlBd9TAiw6iVuS SaxXB2Vh0Z/QAkYO2C1uWMp4rmFlZDkgU X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5d8a:0:b0:474:9991:60d0 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-47550cabbbdmr1238873f8f.12.1782769841932; Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:50:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5d8a:0:b0:474:9991:60d0 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-47550cabbbdmr1238829f8f.12.1782769841353; Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:50:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com (IGLD-80-230-85-71.inter.net.il. [80.230.85.71]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-475674af239sm1206001f8f.30.2026.06.29.14.50.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:50:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 17:50:35 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Miaohe Lin , Naoya Horiguchi , Andrew Morton , Oscar Salvador , Andi Kleen , Hidehiro Kawai , Rik van Riel , Vlastimil Babka , Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R. Howlett" , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Brendan Jackman , Johannes Weiner , Zi Yan , Baolin Wang , Nico Pache , Ryan Roberts , Dev Jain , Barry Song , Lance Yang , Christoph Lameter , David Rientjes , Roman Gushchin , Harry Yoo , Hao Li , Kiryl Shutsemau , Byungchul Park , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: memory-failure: fix HWPoison flag race with non-atomic page flag ops Message-ID: <20260629174225-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <0b5f8b4b-d7dc-4b79-9555-a5b36265f3a9@kernel.org> <20260629030657-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <4f5ba5d6-246c-4430-9737-e8dd8e4c5142@kernel.org> <20260629092856-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <54c8cbee-9b26-458c-93ba-5aa594f5d1e8@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54c8cbee-9b26-458c-93ba-5aa594f5d1e8@kernel.org> On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 11:22:11PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > [...] > > > > > And again, I'm really not sure fixing a theoretical race when memory > > is failing is worth slowing the world by 0.1-1% for. > > > > Fully agreed. I was hoping RCU was cheaper (I mean, we were once told that RCU > read side locking is essentially for free ... well in some configs :) ) > > The question if we could optimize it reasonably enough ... > > > > > From what I saw in my testing, if we allocate 4k pages > > it's hidden by the overhead. With hp and thp it's measureably > > worse than rcu on !preempt config. > > ... for example, by doing the rcu read lock + unlock around the > > for (i = 1; i < (1 << order); i++) { > > loop on the alloc path. Is this different from what this patch is doing? if (unlikely(order)) { int i; hwpoison_rcu_lock(); if (compound) { page[1].flags.f &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_SECOND; #ifdef NR_PAGES_IN_LARGE_FOLIO folio->_nr_pages = 0; #endif } for (i = 1; i < (1 << order); i++) { if (compound) bad += free_tail_page_prepare(page, page + i); if (is_check_pages_enabled()) { if (free_page_is_bad(page + i)) { bad++; continue; } } (page + i)->flags.f &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP; } hwpoison_rcu_unlock(); } > But I suspect it's not going to make that much of a > difference. It makes a difference! Just not enough to make it completely unmeasureable. > I concluded, similar to Andi, that stop_machine() is too big of a hammer. > > I wonder if something could be built out of preempt_disable() and sync SMP > calls. hmm :( rcu_lock is basically same as preempt_disable if rcu is non preemptible, no? > -- > Cheers, > > David