diff mbox series

[V3] mm/gup: Clear the LRU flag of a page before adding to LRU batch

Message ID 1720008153-16035-1-git-send-email-yangge1116@126.com (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series [V3] mm/gup: Clear the LRU flag of a page before adding to LRU batch | expand

Commit Message

Ge Yang July 3, 2024, 12:02 p.m. UTC 
From: yangge <yangge1116@126.com>

If a large number of CMA memory are configured in system (for example, the
CMA memory accounts for 50% of the system memory), starting a virtual
virtual machine with device passthrough, it will
call pin_user_pages_remote(..., FOLL_LONGTERM, ...) to pin memory.
Normally if a page is present and in CMA area, pin_user_pages_remote()
will migrate the page from CMA area to non-CMA area because of
FOLL_LONGTERM flag. But the current code will cause the migration failure
due to unexpected page refcounts, and eventually cause the virtual machine
fail to start.

If a page is added in LRU batch, its refcount increases one, remove the
page from LRU batch decreases one. Page migration requires the page is not
referenced by others except page mapping. Before migrating a page, we
should try to drain the page from LRU batch in case the page is in it,
however, folio_test_lru() is not sufficient to tell whether the page is
in LRU batch or not, if the page is in LRU batch, the migration will fail.

To solve the problem above, we modify the logic of adding to LRU batch.
Before adding a page to LRU batch, we clear the LRU flag of the page so
that we can check whether the page is in LRU batch by folio_test_lru(page).
Seems making the LRU flag of the page invisible a long time is no problem,
because a new page is allocated from buddy and added to the lru batch,
its LRU flag is also not visible for a long time.

Fixes: 9a4e9f3b2d73 ("mm: update get_user_pages_longterm to migrate pages allocated from CMA region")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: yangge <yangge1116@126.com>
---
 mm/swap.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

V3:
   Add fixes tag
V2:
   Adjust code and commit message according to David's comments

Comments

Andrew Morton July 3, 2024, 8:08 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Wed,  3 Jul 2024 20:02:33 +0800 yangge1116@126.com wrote:

> From: yangge <yangge1116@126.com>
> 
> If a large number of CMA memory are configured in system (for example, the
> CMA memory accounts for 50% of the system memory), starting a virtual
> virtual machine with device passthrough, it will
> call pin_user_pages_remote(..., FOLL_LONGTERM, ...) to pin memory.
> Normally if a page is present and in CMA area, pin_user_pages_remote()
> will migrate the page from CMA area to non-CMA area because of
> FOLL_LONGTERM flag. But the current code will cause the migration failure
> due to unexpected page refcounts, and eventually cause the virtual machine
> fail to start.
> 
> If a page is added in LRU batch, its refcount increases one, remove the
> page from LRU batch decreases one. Page migration requires the page is not
> referenced by others except page mapping. Before migrating a page, we
> should try to drain the page from LRU batch in case the page is in it,
> however, folio_test_lru() is not sufficient to tell whether the page is
> in LRU batch or not, if the page is in LRU batch, the migration will fail.
> 
> To solve the problem above, we modify the logic of adding to LRU batch.
> Before adding a page to LRU batch, we clear the LRU flag of the page so
> that we can check whether the page is in LRU batch by folio_test_lru(page).
> Seems making the LRU flag of the page invisible a long time is no problem,
> because a new page is allocated from buddy and added to the lru batch,
> its LRU flag is also not visible for a long time.
> 

Thanks.

I'll add this to the mm-hotfixes branch for additional testing.  Please
continue to work with David on the changelog enhancements.

In mm-hotfixes I'd expect to send it to Linus next week.  I could move
it into mm-unstable (then mm-stable) for merging into 6.11-rc1.  This
is for additional testing time - it will still be backported into
earlier kernels.  We can do this with any patch.
Ge Yang July 4, 2024, 12:57 a.m. UTC | #2 
在 2024/7/4 4:08, Andrew Morton 写道:
> On Wed,  3 Jul 2024 20:02:33 +0800 yangge1116@126.com wrote:
> 
>> From: yangge <yangge1116@126.com>
>>
>> If a large number of CMA memory are configured in system (for example, the
>> CMA memory accounts for 50% of the system memory), starting a virtual
>> virtual machine with device passthrough, it will
>> call pin_user_pages_remote(..., FOLL_LONGTERM, ...) to pin memory.
>> Normally if a page is present and in CMA area, pin_user_pages_remote()
>> will migrate the page from CMA area to non-CMA area because of
>> FOLL_LONGTERM flag. But the current code will cause the migration failure
>> due to unexpected page refcounts, and eventually cause the virtual machine
>> fail to start.
>>
>> If a page is added in LRU batch, its refcount increases one, remove the
>> page from LRU batch decreases one. Page migration requires the page is not
>> referenced by others except page mapping. Before migrating a page, we
>> should try to drain the page from LRU batch in case the page is in it,
>> however, folio_test_lru() is not sufficient to tell whether the page is
>> in LRU batch or not, if the page is in LRU batch, the migration will fail.
>>
>> To solve the problem above, we modify the logic of adding to LRU batch.
>> Before adding a page to LRU batch, we clear the LRU flag of the page so
>> that we can check whether the page is in LRU batch by folio_test_lru(page).
>> Seems making the LRU flag of the page invisible a long time is no problem,
>> because a new page is allocated from buddy and added to the lru batch,
>> its LRU flag is also not visible for a long time.
>>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I'll add this to the mm-hotfixes branch for additional testing.  Please
> continue to work with David on the changelog enhancements.
> 
> In mm-hotfixes I'd expect to send it to Linus next week.  I could move
> it into mm-unstable (then mm-stable) for merging into 6.11-rc1.  This
> is for additional testing time - it will still be backported into
> earlier kernels.  We can do this with any patch.

Ok, thanks.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
index dc205bd..9caf6b0 100644
--- a/mm/swap.c
+++ b/mm/swap.c
@@ -211,10 +211,6 @@  static void folio_batch_move_lru(struct folio_batch *fbatch, move_fn_t move_fn)
 	for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(fbatch); i++) {
 		struct folio *folio = fbatch->folios[i];
 
-		/* block memcg migration while the folio moves between lru */
-		if (move_fn != lru_add_fn && !folio_test_clear_lru(folio))
-			continue;
-
 		folio_lruvec_relock_irqsave(folio, &lruvec, &flags);
 		move_fn(lruvec, folio);
 
@@ -255,11 +251,16 @@  static void lru_move_tail_fn(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
 void folio_rotate_reclaimable(struct folio *folio)
 {
 	if (!folio_test_locked(folio) && !folio_test_dirty(folio) &&
-	    !folio_test_unevictable(folio) && folio_test_lru(folio)) {
+	    !folio_test_unevictable(folio)) {
 		struct folio_batch *fbatch;
 		unsigned long flags;
 
 		folio_get(folio);
+		if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio)) {
+			folio_put(folio);
+			return;
+		}
+
 		local_lock_irqsave(&lru_rotate.lock, flags);
 		fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&lru_rotate.fbatch);
 		folio_batch_add_and_move(fbatch, folio, lru_move_tail_fn);
@@ -352,11 +353,15 @@  static void folio_activate_drain(int cpu)
 
 void folio_activate(struct folio *folio)
 {
-	if (folio_test_lru(folio) && !folio_test_active(folio) &&
-	    !folio_test_unevictable(folio)) {
+	if (!folio_test_active(folio) && !folio_test_unevictable(folio)) {
 		struct folio_batch *fbatch;
 
 		folio_get(folio);
+		if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio)) {
+			folio_put(folio);
+			return;
+		}
+
 		local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
 		fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_fbatches.activate);
 		folio_batch_add_and_move(fbatch, folio, folio_activate_fn);
@@ -700,6 +705,11 @@  void deactivate_file_folio(struct folio *folio)
 		return;
 
 	folio_get(folio);
+	if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio)) {
+		folio_put(folio);
+		return;
+	}
+
 	local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
 	fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_fbatches.lru_deactivate_file);
 	folio_batch_add_and_move(fbatch, folio, lru_deactivate_file_fn);
@@ -716,11 +726,16 @@  void deactivate_file_folio(struct folio *folio)
  */
 void folio_deactivate(struct folio *folio)
 {
-	if (folio_test_lru(folio) && !folio_test_unevictable(folio) &&
-	    (folio_test_active(folio) || lru_gen_enabled())) {
+	if (!folio_test_unevictable(folio) && (folio_test_active(folio) ||
+	    lru_gen_enabled())) {
 		struct folio_batch *fbatch;
 
 		folio_get(folio);
+		if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio)) {
+			folio_put(folio);
+			return;
+		}
+
 		local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
 		fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_fbatches.lru_deactivate);
 		folio_batch_add_and_move(fbatch, folio, lru_deactivate_fn);
@@ -737,12 +752,16 @@  void folio_deactivate(struct folio *folio)
  */
 void folio_mark_lazyfree(struct folio *folio)
 {
-	if (folio_test_lru(folio) && folio_test_anon(folio) &&
-	    folio_test_swapbacked(folio) && !folio_test_swapcache(folio) &&
-	    !folio_test_unevictable(folio)) {
+	if (folio_test_anon(folio) && folio_test_swapbacked(folio) &&
+	    !folio_test_swapcache(folio) && !folio_test_unevictable(folio)) {
 		struct folio_batch *fbatch;
 
 		folio_get(folio);
+		if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio)) {
+			folio_put(folio);
+			return;
+		}
+
 		local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
 		fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_fbatches.lru_lazyfree);
 		folio_batch_add_and_move(fbatch, folio, lru_lazyfree_fn);