Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:144:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 4csp737969pxw; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 21:52:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzddhuzdNPiyOPfT8ihEOY72s8zg3PGTu8Vh3kUI7jIo31xxk7zMKpZx7wEcmJdeqK272WL X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:2c7:b0:158:2f26:6016 with SMTP id s7-20020a17090302c700b001582f266016mr3862034plk.154.1649479978025; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 21:52:58 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1649479978; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=r84VHFcu1EAfF+kqPAoeHwurnC8hvi9hQNs9riAUfB+JcT7paH5TCjTXPLb5nxVYpR hoTKy/DdaiqOzD6/aZ0KFACBsGkgMwjkffqYVuBevD3gMqghU2vVmL5P5z/6mxxwP3S+ 8funOKJwDDvElHBnKrDKgFCDlvBXiJ0Z3V+rI4tx6ZSDRszvGjNU4cWRPv7UTkxnaum3 oxNB7OqcKV+v6uMuxTY4Kxpq84QQ2Gc47ECHji0f4UHace0TogVZVZovcSJ3HOI0RHsV fBA+QI9RDtLJP+zd/B3WuV1J1V6OWPZkklIuuaK+QKsJP7ZjoxOwu6DvGCbe+CfBKU4D o3PA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=u+kUNyfJxKm1ujevbiKigyKUXoT0kLKRU8aUxaHDSJE=; b=L+SbXfd1/HNxBcE60OFs+z5zkePKMTgEcrOuUanW6zjfxQJWOSBR2YAT3X69ky7ZtH wEH+lEwbGgTwbFz3HJ5zkUsP7RPdV2vLKjTm/K6JmerpIb35BY9Qn1BCOTRg7ao7vhzW ux3EMEUok9omjzsLGzK+kiwDQJcIZVs9AreqLW9q5Kf+OQ/vYXlKvA2GpGFwmEb9lNfo pDgpWS5QHKprD44ZUHngbtXDXo1UMlJksiKJolupIys0zd2a3usSXrZLymKaa/GEtvfP kArw9wHYW9xxTicezJ/5qliCypYyRDz2aFJjSIYr9VfywlTpXKkEXjkn+xWpYuTBMy/I DguQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=LrDF39pF; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t67-20020a637846000000b003865f06faf7si3102913pgc.825.2022.04.08.21.52.44; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 21:52:58 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=LrDF39pF; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234638AbiDHReu (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 8 Apr 2022 13:34:50 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50488 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230438AbiDHRet (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2022 13:34:49 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1030.google.com (mail-pj1-x1030.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1030]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FDE92B65BE for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:32:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1030.google.com with SMTP id ll10so822377pjb.5 for ; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 10:32:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=u+kUNyfJxKm1ujevbiKigyKUXoT0kLKRU8aUxaHDSJE=; b=LrDF39pFuyzFZCAc/KZZzv/i/lQS7AbtFvrZsJC9ht/xGzpR4Uap43EwOT5pCq/gN0 0m1zd3eKnI3N0ZqQP8BuVhki7pJYY6UMdIBH4phNgf8qTpH5VTEHtFOqCwsQwA62br0G Q1uJDMHB/x21RFxO+Z8hf6PAlMJkaWLmo/ZCnKot2lzGZ+MonvsIuMf8Z9zoOw2Gv1tg c4YlFWRUNBZyH2vdaEAEu/LKLWYOx2Rqw1i29D/YkmDw+0DTeSlquJ0xpHtTWLeW8uGL 7H+QtiemzbyiWRUSZz3F8a8DKxGLKb+OBTD3ZJq1ocgSbKbQ8ULO1gTGmuGEp7520Gmw O8lw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u+kUNyfJxKm1ujevbiKigyKUXoT0kLKRU8aUxaHDSJE=; b=qQlVqGN5Q9bWGt2N5xEiPSLa1sytTTCfkWkhwjWzoYuq7WqkBVsLYlJzOPWFQlcUI0 cwp9E27kGBQsSuqyvrbrxFmSdPl7oy1a35BcPD75eik6A+f0XoNDefY4iMVYoIhjgVBy 2pnTZWIE1PLpShxqopww0AJ07wHgOxBUjVnoqVRl1EsWtWrjhwiGl0hLYgBEeWlL6U5Y owd3b1OQqQe6fleOvXtJikDhoSwO4Rxrmkb5tZSXp4llnnQRE2D12TUjSC7aP7hOTcMc C1EdIguO/TMKT2W3GCs25ODe9Ik30zTiUbNzV6/szGVQQPLfb0iwQyOa21zOBhlj4HVi O+Lw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53125EHxVjkewXXD2D06p9CxbjoH5gQLwOM3TX3XXGHpK8oNAvwZ hqjyxLbrjZjSziYuiIOYQuxLRi03czMSqU7bymI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9304:b0:155:eb5a:8dd4 with SMTP id bc4-20020a170902930400b00155eb5a8dd4mr20540077plb.117.1649439164974; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 10:32:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220407130352.15618-1-linmiaohe@huawei.com> <20220407130352.15618-2-linmiaohe@huawei.com> <09d363ba-5bd0-75ae-8ece-cd91997f1b46@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <09d363ba-5bd0-75ae-8ece-cd91997f1b46@redhat.com> From: Yang Shi Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:32:33 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/memory-failure.c: avoid false-postive PageSwapCache test To: David Hildenbrand Cc: Miaohe Lin , Andrew Morton , =?UTF-8?B?SE9SSUdVQ0hJIE5BT1lBKOWggOWPoyDnm7TkuZ8p?= , Mike Kravetz , Linux MM , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT, FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 1:52 AM David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 07.04.22 15:03, Miaohe Lin wrote: > > PageSwapCache is only reliable when PageAnon is true because PG_swapcache > > serves as PG_owner_priv_1 which can be used by fs if it's pagecache page. > > So we should test PageAnon to distinguish pagecache page from swapcache > > page to avoid false-postive PageSwapCache test. > > Well, that's not quite correct. Just because a page is PageAnon() > doesn't mean that it's in the swapache. It means that it might be in the > swapcache but cannot be in the pagecache. > > Maybe you wanted to say > > "So we should test PageAnon() to distinguish pagecache pages from > anonymous pages." Yeah, I agree. The patch looks fine to me with David's comment addressed. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin > > --- > > mm/memory-failure.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c > > index ef402b490663..2e97302d62e4 100644 > > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c > > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c > > @@ -2262,7 +2262,7 @@ static int __soft_offline_page(struct page *page) > > return 0; > > } > > > > - if (!PageHuge(page) && PageLRU(page) && !PageSwapCache(page)) > > + if (!PageHuge(page) && PageLRU(page) && !PageAnon(page)) > > /* > > * Try to invalidate first. This should work for > > * non dirty unmapped page cache pages. > > > -- > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb > >