Received: by 2002:a25:8b91:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp22067497ybl; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 17:24:22 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxLJCScgUgtiQk7mir50+l4qXMX1ROVfze8ihotGPt8dziU0FCMp3esuU5lgTu0aczrkwbR X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6045:: with SMTP id v5mr110739654otj.252.1578360262287; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 17:24:22 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1578360262; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=q0bz22cDOKng6LvrReoDiqg1v/EpqR6vgwWWrcwh/29GDBdWtq6hfPPPhTXsbgUSkh VPnX3Xe7GImVTArb/zn9epSCvAlhlKyycfTSaFCTRYm7j+v6KY3ERAdQY1NGtPPFVe1L kSxqSg2xQYSsBx3v83BySAPJC+rW6XPZ8bUegntxMHnkA6/EHiZ9oGGY8uWWXSNkmbI3 YV4C/cnXrXjg4P4ZufR/f/hMhsxXyVRuiufLjKMSu4Zz71Xap0XzBRADNd60WeK/4S6o 85gQjAnVsXCpx0M4cqHC4sGKQFLOsykEeIRLp9a2aEutujyrJf6HNzG+al+trVZRbTj8 xFGg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:reply-to:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=DlrfSRyDRncC7hf3fR7BIm+7OfcgsMbjw6DK/GOuZNg=; b=OeKqs3tFVLWzVn0cT9jqI6JHGsNoSZTdYIzwPxTUVWhXf8E+ibC/YlfhJ4kVrxYlaE hnFEOtKeOdunfXXn5r5zY97cDbZBVxpWOWac2X8Lm+2PxgZOBw5KsdUuFZnFliZb+rN0 S5V/ptBAkOlIytR53gSCjnUtp8v/RnJ8Z8yuONgHtrIQurhAW3i/9H5ZePEaTJ3vGtgw JiETOj7uZBadHabB2YaLQjCwf+lUgpghlCfJ5YR4BdQnhViw8YJSWW24Fr8jw9xYQocx LaH7FELzV3JndSLO7wtECAv/IGUfp8HAakD+7TDyIkLFFUuablH7007zPTsDdVjnXDOU 5CZw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n63si26742054oib.210.2020.01.06.17.23.56; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 17:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727363AbgAGBWj (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 6 Jan 2020 20:22:39 -0500 Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:6547 "EHLO mga17.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727295AbgAGBWi (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jan 2020 20:22:38 -0500 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Jan 2020 17:22:38 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,404,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="420887474" Received: from richard.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.159.54]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2020 17:22:36 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 09:22:41 +0800 From: Wei Yang To: Michal Hocko Cc: Wei Yang , hannes@cmpxchg.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: thp: grab the lock before manipulation defer list Message-ID: <20200107012241.GA15341@richard> Reply-To: Wei Yang References: <20200103143407.1089-1-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <20200106102345.GE12699@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200106102345.GE12699@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 11:23:45AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >On Fri 03-01-20 22:34:07, Wei Yang wrote: >> As all the other places, we grab the lock before manipulate the defer list. >> Current implementation may face a race condition. > >Please always make sure to describe the effect of the change. Why a racy >list_empty check matters? > Hmm... access the list without proper lock leads to many bad behaviors. For example, if we grab the lock after checking list_empty, the page may already be removed from list in split_huge_page_list. And then list_del_init would trigger bug. -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me