From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92554C33CB6 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:35:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6351D21835 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:35:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1579714539; bh=UwWBY0rv/xun7WW6eYlZvZ0bFrfh0AYx/45lZ2gLbMM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=duH3jcC+cBVgWndpaFxZl4YbDLlNRd82x+qocHZNtkK+inzExorTLwik38Fr9Gjaf gVFKXv9MIcBLCU0SM7WKPlkV0ABRU8coX+cMDvDScBRLhlc0L/O7sMoGIBVdwPYDKL UlJRNL8hHWB0QzCh1YyR831DdnrYlXRFDnfWNap0= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725924AbgAVRfi (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2020 12:35:38 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f67.google.com ([209.85.221.67]:38588 "EHLO mail-wr1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725802AbgAVRfi (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2020 12:35:38 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f67.google.com with SMTP id y17so8240608wrh.5; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 09:35:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=9Pe/uYHnvD7wJ1+X4A+H8G503m8mWdzB/nxe1uw/mAQ=; b=cPny9QGG+qiY9urdA/wATYOk3CKhC3JlSeTXymy69lqgOSheNGOtJhIGjAd7bYIrN+ 7/W5W7XMGdKidr+iVlhB3DVruCc+AqckV8rtPgIOSr38HoNaTxkz9QM80ktTXyM76faH j8LocTMqfgOQ4r7uf9/gbbBz6ic9A4Pu2Ln5+LrY6qf2iidQ6MaH33q3a0xqKiYBDtJg LO7vZRpfWeZb/K8e+9yj5Q6IlwSr3x8X7ym4Pzm9MIRnWM3LECzKHlwG9oCGfqBNVF2m jQL+ygmJytXyp5HcJ/n29+UhMT1VBLdEtjGrI1wyG/H6GGbYO5ugr+NONPPoWpndeqZr ebWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXNtIYWJ6oxis/WfVhEr6rv4IZ0osiPT50qXdcc0lboCdxOpf+c Dg7LChzUmBjZwpmiCGiobuKUwOX8 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzg4A5jYG+OTYsXFOx3mFiR8QHqyAw7pd8bR5fs8YrtdTrdd3elR1SXpbXC3Bkkw1qPvLxDKA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:51c1:: with SMTP id n1mr11886367wrv.335.1579714535488; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 09:35:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (ip-37-188-245-167.eurotel.cz. [37.188.245.167]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z123sm4893496wme.18.2020.01.22.09.35.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Jan 2020 09:35:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:35:32 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Yang Shi Cc: Wei Yang , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: move_pages: fix the return value if there are not-migrated pages Message-ID: <20200122173532.GZ29276@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1579325203-16405-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com> <20200120130624.GD18451@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200120131744.GE18451@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200121014416.GC1567@richard> <20200121084040.GC29276@dhcp22.suse.cz> <27b993f4-cc50-d5a9-1cda-89dd022aea16@linux.alibaba.com> <20200122080651.GN29276@dhcp22.suse.cz> <17d51bf6-3cdf-bade-c32a-add30b8a7214@linux.alibaba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17d51bf6-3cdf-bade-c32a-add30b8a7214@linux.alibaba.com> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Wed 22-01-20 09:26:48, Yang Shi wrote: > > > On 1/22/20 12:06 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 21-01-20 11:01:30, Yang Shi wrote: > > > > > > On 1/21/20 12:40 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Tue 21-01-20 09:44:16, Wei Yang wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 02:17:44PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > On Mon 20-01-20 14:06:26, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat 18-01-20 13:26:43, Yang Shi wrote: > > > > > > > > The do_move_pages_to_node() might return > 0 value, the number of pages > > > > > > > > that are not migrated, then the value will be returned to userspace > > > > > > > > directly. But, move_pages() syscall would just return 0 or errno. So, > > > > > > > > we need reset the return value to 0 for such case as what pre-v4.17 did. > > > > > > > The patch is wrong. migrate_pages returns the number of pages it > > > > > > > _hasn't_ migrated or -errno. Yeah that semantic sucks but... > > > > > > > So err != 0 is always an error. Except err > 0 doesn't really provide > > > > > > > any useful information to the userspace. I cannot really remember what > > > > > > > was the actual behavior before my rework because there were some gotchas > > > > > > > hidden there. > > > > > > OK, so I've double checked. do_move_page_to_node_array would carry the > > > > > > error code over to do_pages_move and it would store the status stored > > > > > > in the pm array. It contains page_to_nid(page) so the resulting code > > > > > > indeed behaves properly before my change and this is a regression. I > > > > > Thanks, I see the change. > > > > > > > > > > > have a very vague recollection that this has been brought up already. > > > > > > <...looks in notes...> > > > > > > Found it! The report is > > > > > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/0329efa0984b9b0252ef166abb4498c0795fab36.1535113317.git.jstancek@redhat.com > > > > > > and my proposed workaround was http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180829145537.GZ10223@dhcp22.suse.cz > > > > > Well, the above two links return 404. > > > > You are right. They are not archived for some reason. Anyway, the patch > > > > I was proposing back then is below: > > > > > > > > commit cfb88c266b645197135cde2905c2bfc82f6d82a9 > > > > Author: Michal Hocko > > > > Date: Wed Nov 14 12:19:09 2018 +0100 > > > > > > > > mm: fix do_pages_move error reporting > > > > a49bd4d71637 ("mm, numa: rework do_pages_move") has changed the way how > > > > we report error to layers above. As the changelog mentioned the semantic > > > > was quite unclear previously because the return 0 could mean both > > > > success and failure. > > > > The above mentioned commit didn't get all the way down to fix this > > > > completely because it doesn't report pages that we even haven't > > > > attempted to migrate and therefore we cannot simply say that the > > > > semantic is: > > > > - err < 0 - errno > > > > - err >= 0 number of non-migrated pages. > > > > Fixes: a49bd4d71637 ("mm, numa: rework do_pages_move") > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko > > > Thanks, Michal. But, it looks this patch still could return > 0 value (the > > > total number of non-migrated pages, including not even attempted pages) too, > > > but the problem we are trying to fix is to make do_pages_move() return <= 0 > > > value only since the man page of move_pages() doesn't allow return > 0 > > > value. > > Yes this patch just lives with the changed semantic and tries to make it > > sensible. So if some page cannot be migrated then we just stop and > > return the number of non migrated pages at the tail of the given array. > > This would make error handling slightly easier because you know that > > count - ret pages of the array can be skipped if ret >= 0. > > OK, I see. Returning > 0 value sounds more straightforward for userspace > error handling. > > BTW, we should update manpage to reflect the semantic change to indicate > 0 > return value as an error case. Absolutely. > > > And, by looking into the old code (v4.16), I spotted another problem. The > > > migrate_pages() would store the migration failure error code into > > > page_to_node->status. So, When do_move_page_to_node_array() returns > 0 > > > value, the return value would be reset to 0 and the migration error codes > > > for non-migrated pages would be stored into status to return to userspace. > > > But, the rework removed this. > > > > > > I didn't dig into the intention of the rework, is it expected? > > I have tried to preserve the original semantic as possible. As explained > > in the changelog there were quite some discrepancies even before. This > > new one was not really intentional. We have effectively two options > > here. Either somebody really depend on the former semantic and we have > > to fix this or we can relax the semantic as the above patch attempts. > > > > I would be more inclined for the second option as nobody has complained > > about the new semantic except for few ltp tests which do not represent > > real workload. If you have a real usecase then speak up please. > > No, I don't have any real usecase. And, I tend to agree the most users may > not care the reason of migration failure at all. Returning the number of > non-migrated pages seems more straightforward. > > I agree we could stick with the new semantic and fix the return value as > what your patch did. I'm going to rebase your patch on top of Wei Yang's > cleanup if you don't mind. Go ahead. Thanks a lot! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs