From: Donet Tom <donettom@linux.ibm.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>,
Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>, shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: migration :shared anonymous migration test is failing
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 07:46:20 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ac9f502-ecdf-440c-9797-a6318c92b882@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3c1665df-9367-4d43-8aa1-6726fbb59640@redhat.com>
On 12/19/24 18:25, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 19.12.24 13:47, Donet Tom wrote:
>> The migration selftest is currently failing for shared anonymous
>> mappings due to a race condition.
>>
>> During migration, the source folio's PTE is unmapped by nuking the
>> PTE, flushing the TLB,and then marking the page for migration
>> (by creating the swap entries). The issue arises when, immediately
>> after the PTE is nuked and the TLB is flushed, but before the page
>> is marked for migration, another thread accesses the page. This
>> triggers a page fault, and the page fault handler invokes
>> do_pte_missing() instead of do_swap_page(), as the page is not yet
>> marked for migration.
>>
>> In the fault handling path, do_pte_missing() calls __do_fault()
>> ->shmem_fault() -> shmem_get_folio_gfp() -> filemap_get_entry().
>> This eventually calls folio_try_get(), incrementing the reference
>> count of the folio undergoing migration. The thread then blocks
>> on folio_lock(), as the migration path holds the lock. This
>> results in the migration failing in __migrate_folio(), which expects
>> the folio's reference count to be 2. However, the reference count is
>> incremented by the fault handler, leading to the failure.
>>
>> The issue arises because, after nuking the PTE and before marking the
>> page for migration, the page is accessed. To address this, we have
>> updated the logic to first nuke the PTE, then mark the page for
>> migration, and only then flush the TLB. With this patch, If the page is
>> accessed immediately after nuking the PTE, the TLB entry is still
>> valid, so no fault occurs. After marking the page for migration,
>> flushing the TLB ensures that the next page fault correctly triggers
>> do_swap_page() and waits for the migration to complete.
>>
>
> Does this reproduce with
>
> commit 536ab838a5b37b6ae3f8d53552560b7c51daeb41
> Author: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
> Date: Fri Aug 30 10:46:09 2024 +0530
>
> selftests/mm: relax test to fail after 100 migration failures
> It was recently observed at [1] that during the folio
> unmapping stage of
> migration, when the PTEs are cleared, a racing thread faulting on
> that
> folio may increase the refcount of the folio, sleep on the folio
> lock (the
> migration path has the lock), and migration ultimately fails when
> asserting the actual refcount against the expected. Thereby, the
> migration selftest fails on shared-anon mappings. The above
> enforces the
> fact that migration is a best-effort service, therefore, it is
> wrong to
> fail the test for just a single failure; hence, fail the test
> after 100
> consecutive failures (where 100 is still a subjective choice).
> Note that,
> this has no effect on the execution time of the test since that is
> controlled by a timeout.
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240801081657.1386743-1-dev.jain@arm.com/
>
> part of 6.12?
>
>
> As part of that discussion, we discussed alternatives, such as
> retrying migration more often internally.
>
I was trying with this patch and was able to recreate the issue on PowerPC.
I tried increasing the retry count, but the test was still failing.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-20 2:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-19 12:47 [PATCH] mm: migration :shared anonymous migration test is failing Donet Tom
2024-12-19 12:55 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-12-20 2:16 ` Donet Tom [this message]
2024-12-19 12:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-12-20 2:55 ` Donet Tom
2024-12-20 10:11 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-12-23 12:08 ` Donet Tom
2024-12-20 2:31 ` Baolin Wang
2024-12-20 3:12 ` Donet Tom
2024-12-20 3:32 ` Baolin Wang
2024-12-20 4:30 ` Donet Tom
2024-12-20 4:37 ` Dev Jain
2024-12-23 12:02 ` Donet Tom
2024-12-20 10:05 ` kernel test robot
2024-12-20 10:17 ` 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=4ac9f502-ecdf-440c-9797-a6318c92b882@linux.ibm.com \
--to=donettom@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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