aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/arch/s390
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorHugh Dickins2018-12-28 00:36:14 -0800
committerLinus Torvalds2018-12-28 12:11:48 -0800
commit9a1ea439b16b92002e0a6fceebc5d1794906e297 (patch)
tree101e06903ff748d910d5735066362c2c533b0a1e /arch/s390
parentf0c867d9588d9efc10d6a55009c9560336673369 (diff)
mm: put_and_wait_on_page_locked() while page is migrated
Waiting on a page migration entry has used wait_on_page_locked() all along since 2006: but you cannot safely wait_on_page_locked() without holding a reference to the page, and that extra reference is enough to make migrate_page_move_mapping() fail with -EAGAIN, when a racing task faults on the entry before migrate_page_move_mapping() gets there. And that failure is retried nine times, amplifying the pain when trying to migrate a popular page. With a single persistent faulter, migration sometimes succeeds; with two or three concurrent faulters, success becomes much less likely (and the more the page was mapped, the worse the overhead of unmapping and remapping it on each try). This is especially a problem for memory offlining, where the outer level retries forever (or until terminated from userspace), because a heavy refault workload can trigger an endless loop of migration failures. wait_on_page_locked() is the wrong tool for the job. David Herrmann (but was he the first?) noticed this issue in 2014: https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=140110465608116&w=2 Tim Chen started a thread in August 2017 which appears relevant: https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=150275941014915&w=2 where Kan Liang went on to implicate __migration_entry_wait(): https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=150300268411980&w=2 and the thread ended up with the v4.14 commits: 2554db916586 ("sched/wait: Break up long wake list walk") 11a19c7b099f ("sched/wait: Introduce wakeup boomark in wake_up_page_bit") Baoquan He reported "Memory hotplug softlock issue" 14 November 2018: https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=154217936431300&w=2 We have all assumed that it is essential to hold a page reference while waiting on a page lock: partly to guarantee that there is still a struct page when MEMORY_HOTREMOVE is configured, but also to protect against reuse of the struct page going to someone who then holds the page locked indefinitely, when the waiter can reasonably expect timely unlocking. But in fact, so long as wait_on_page_bit_common() does the put_page(), and is careful not to rely on struct page contents thereafter, there is no need to hold a reference to the page while waiting on it. That does mean that this case cannot go back through the loop: but that's fine for the page migration case, and even if used more widely, is limited by the "Stop walking if it's locked" optimization in wake_page_function(). Add interface put_and_wait_on_page_locked() to do this, using "behavior" enum in place of "lock" arg to wait_on_page_bit_common() to implement it. No interruptible or killable variant needed yet, but they might follow: I have a vague notion that reporting -EINTR should take precedence over return from wait_on_page_bit_common() without knowing the page state, so arrange it accordingly - but that may be nothing but pedantic. __migration_entry_wait() still has to take a brief reference to the page, prior to calling put_and_wait_on_page_locked(): but now that it is dropped before waiting, the chance of impeding page migration is very much reduced. Should we perhaps disable preemption across this? shrink_page_list()'s __ClearPageLocked(): that was a surprise! This survived a lot of testing before that showed up. PageWaiters may have been set by wait_on_page_bit_common(), and the reference dropped, just before shrink_page_list() succeeds in freezing its last page reference: in such a case, unlock_page() must be used. Follow the suggestion from Michal Hocko, just revert a978d6f52106 ("mm: unlockless reclaim") now: that optimization predates PageWaiters, and won't buy much these days; but we can reinstate it for the !PageWaiters case if anyone notices. It does raise the question: should vmscan.c's is_page_cache_freeable() and __remove_mapping() now treat a PageWaiters page as if an extra reference were held? Perhaps, but I don't think it matters much, since shrink_page_list() already had to win its trylock_page(), so waiters are not very common there: I noticed no difference when trying the bigger change, and it's surely not needed while put_and_wait_on_page_locked() is only used for page migration. [willy@infradead.org: add put_and_wait_on_page_locked() kerneldoc] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.LSU.2.11.1811261121330.1116@eggly.anvils Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Reported-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> Tested-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> Cc: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/s390')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions