From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD63B56B81 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2025 05:26:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759209985; cv=none; b=AO3Ka+/bgTrKq8eqZfmljn+YDyXihGFvOZXxtxlVv3ojMsTWBXFdH+wxbINNSor8aedYE9Vd6triRv6zIYgbmKmnORfxBhF+JjWvLEVLSq9PQ3u7LFtzzLKhaWjOiic6B/w19dfhor1JwrsPKiRNT/Klau6rZgyNFZZxQkkTbP0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759209985; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vaekgufu7e17ibSD/1+KqWanG9gui0O5PHhadNh/0WE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=EuRbLC+0A/2NuWqLSpXZlcBNx29tlUUNRIg44883omkEvzQrQa6kAP+PwoGgNjfgqGV28aASyxZ3G1wfRxOvFiBxg+WZ4w5IeTlRaduMNMQC9BJQAhJGVxav+/91GCAVJtRVhLIKkAhpVPaFgD0t3Zt0gUlmzQEoS7oUKH4W/1k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 054201424; Mon, 29 Sep 2025 22:26:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.164.18.53] (MacBook-Pro.blr.arm.com [10.164.18.53]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 145EE3F5A1; Mon, 29 Sep 2025 22:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 10:56:15 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] mm: hugetlb: avoid soft lockup when mprotect to large memory area To: Yang Shi , muchun.song@linux.dev, osalvador@suse.de, david@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, anshuman.khandual@arm.com, carl@os.amperecomputing.com, cl@gentwo.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20250929202402.1663290-1-yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Dev Jain In-Reply-To: <20250929202402.1663290-1-yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 30/09/25 1:54 am, Yang Shi wrote: > When calling mprotect() to a large hugetlb memory area in our customer's > workload (~300GB hugetlb memory), soft lockup was observed: > > watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#98 stuck for 23s! [t2_new_sysv:126916] > > CPU: 98 PID: 126916 Comm: t2_new_sysv Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.17-rc7 > Hardware name: GIGACOMPUTING R2A3-T40-AAV1/Jefferson CIO, BIOS 5.4.4.1 07/15/2025 > pstate: 20400009 (nzCv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) > pc : mte_clear_page_tags+0x14/0x24 > lr : mte_sync_tags+0x1c0/0x240 > sp : ffff80003150bb80 > x29: ffff80003150bb80 x28: ffff00739e9705a8 x27: 0000ffd2d6a00000 > x26: 0000ff8e4bc00000 x25: 00e80046cde00f45 x24: 0000000000022458 > x23: 0000000000000000 x22: 0000000000000004 x21: 000000011b380000 > x20: ffff000000000000 x19: 000000011b379f40 x18: 0000000000000000 > x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 x15: 0000000000000000 > x14: 0000000000000000 x13: 0000000000000000 x12: 0000000000000000 > x11: 0000000000000000 x10: 0000000000000000 x9 : ffffc875e0aa5e2c > x8 : 0000000000000000 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 0000000000000000 > x5 : fffffc01ce7a5c00 x4 : 00000000046cde00 x3 : fffffc0000000000 > x2 : 0000000000000004 x1 : 0000000000000040 x0 : ffff0046cde7c000 > > Call trace: >   mte_clear_page_tags+0x14/0x24 >   set_huge_pte_at+0x25c/0x280 >   hugetlb_change_protection+0x220/0x430 >   change_protection+0x5c/0x8c >   mprotect_fixup+0x10c/0x294 >   do_mprotect_pkey.constprop.0+0x2e0/0x3d4 >   __arm64_sys_mprotect+0x24/0x44 >   invoke_syscall+0x50/0x160 >   el0_svc_common+0x48/0x144 >   do_el0_svc+0x30/0xe0 >   el0_svc+0x30/0xf0 >   el0t_64_sync_handler+0xc4/0x148 >   el0t_64_sync+0x1a4/0x1a8 > > Soft lockup is not triggered with THP or base page because there is > cond_resched() called for each PMD size. > > Although the soft lockup was triggered by MTE, it should be not MTE > specific. The other processing which takes long time in the loop may > trigger soft lockup too. > > So add cond_resched() for hugetlb to avoid soft lockup. > > Fixes: 8f860591ffb2 ("[PATCH] Enable mprotect on huge pages") > Tested-by: Carl Worth > Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter (Ampere) > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas > Acked-by: David Hildenbrand > Acked-by: Oscar Salvador > Reviewed-by: Anshuman Khandual > Signed-off-by: Yang Shi > --- > v2: - Made the subject and commit message less MTE specific and fixed > the fixes tag. > - Collected all R-bs and A-bs. > > mm/hugetlb.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c > index cb5c4e79e0b8..fe6606d91b31 100644 > --- a/mm/hugetlb.c > +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c > @@ -7242,6 +7242,8 @@ long hugetlb_change_protection(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > psize); > } > spin_unlock(ptl); > + > + cond_resched(); > } > /* > * Must flush TLB before releasing i_mmap_rwsem: x86's huge_pmd_unshare Reviewed-by: Dev Jain Does it make sense to also do cond_resched() in the huge_pmd_unshare() branch? That also amounts to clearing a page. And I can see for example, zap_huge_pmd() and change_huge_pmd() consume a cond_resched().