Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sat, 26 Dec 2020 13:03:53 -0800 (PST)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Allow architectures to request 'old' entries
 when prefaulting
In-Reply-To: <20201226204335.dikqkrkezqet6oqf@box>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2012261246450.1629@eggly.anvils>
References: <20201217105409.2gacwgg7rco2ft3m@box> <CAHk-=wiyPTnQ9E1dT9LJtNxeVmLaykursk_MSecUqFjSb3gwAw@mail.gmail.com> <20201218110400.yve45r3zsv7qgfa3@box> <CAHk-=wgO2LsoKhX7MjSECo+Xrj1-Me7tzRfNcsdEZBRwJW1cQg@mail.gmail.com> <20201219124103.w6isern3ywc7xbur@box>
 <CAHk-=wifcVaxaTn_RbZ=idfYFazTPwm8t5cB1rY6xEBjbcfO5g@mail.gmail.com> <20201222100047.p5zdb4ghagncq2oe@box> <alpine.LSU.2.11.2012231905300.5723@eggly.anvils> <20201225113157.e7hmluffh56fszfc@box> <CAHk-=wiT50aEErZgZOrbFQ=GhFuM3MnBmHoSBSScN9rmXMnOKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201226204335.dikqkrkezqet6oqf@box>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 26 Dec 2020, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 09:57:13AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Because not only does that get rid of the "if (page)" test, I think it
> > would make things a bit clearer. When I read the patch first, the
> > initial "next_page()" call confused me.
> 
> Agreed. Here we go:
> 
> From d12dea4abe94dbc24b7945329b191ad7d29e213a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 15:19:23 +0300
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: Cleanup faultaround and finish_fault() codepaths
> 
> alloc_set_pte() has two users with different requirements: in the
> faultaround code, it called from an atomic context and PTE page table
> has to be preallocated. finish_fault() can sleep and allocate page table
> as needed.
> 
> PTL locking rules are also strange, hard to follow and overkill for
> finish_fault().
> 
> Let's untangle the mess. alloc_set_pte() has gone now. All locking is
> explicit.
> 
> The price is some code duplication to handle huge pages in faultaround
> path, but it should be fine, having overall improvement in readability.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>

Hold on. I guess this one will suffer from the same bug as the previous.
I was about to report back, after satisfactory overnight testing of that
version - provided that one big little bug is fixed:

--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -2919,7 +2919,7 @@ static bool filemap_map_pmd(struct vm_fa
 
 	if (pmd_none(*vmf->pmd) &&
 	    PageTransHuge(page) &&
-	    do_set_pmd(vmf, page)) {
+	    do_set_pmd(vmf, page) == 0) {
 		unlock_page(page);
 		return true;
 	}

(Yes, you can write that as !do_set_pmd(vmf, page), and maybe I'm odd,
but even though it's very common, I have a personal aversion to using
"!' on a positive-sounding function that returns 0 for success.)

I'll give the new patch a try now, but with that fix added in. Without it,
I got "Bad page" on compound_mapcount on file THP pages - but I run with
a BUG() inside of bad_page() so I cannot miss them: I did not look to see
what the eventual crash or page leak would look like without that.

Hugh