Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.32 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.32;
Date:   Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:21:13 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Hannes Reineke <hare@suse.de>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Remove special-casing of compound pages
Message-ID: <ZQRoWVntO22VWL8K@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20230814144100.596749-1-willy@infradead.org>
 <94635da5-ce28-a8fb-84e3-7a9f5240fe6a@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <94635da5-ce28-a8fb-84e3-7a9f5240fe6a@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 01:27:17PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > This problem predates the folio work; it could for example have been
> > triggered by mmaping a THP in tmpfs and using that as the target of an
> > O_DIRECT read.
> > 
> > Fixes: 800d8c63b2e98 ("shmem: add huge pages support")
> 
> No. It's a good catch, but bug looks specific to the folio work to me.
> 
> Almost all shmem pages are dirty from birth, even as soon as they are
> brought back from swap; so it is not necessary to re-mark them dirty.
> 
> The exceptions are pages allocated to holes when faulted: so you did
> get me worried as to whether khugepaged could collapse a pmd-ful of
> those into a THP without marking the result as dirty.
> 
> But no, in v6.5-rc6 the collapse_file() success path has
> 	if (is_shmem)
> 		folio_mark_dirty(folio);
> and in v5.10 the same appears as
> 		if (is_shmem)
> 			set_page_dirty(new_page);
> 
> (IIRC, that or marking pmd dirty was missed from early shmem THP
> support, but fairly soon corrected, and backported to stable then.
> I have a faint memory of versions which assembled pmd_dirty from
> collected pte_dirtys.)
> 
> And the !is_shmem case is for CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS: writing
> into those pages, by direct IO or whatever, is already prohibited.
> 
> It's dem dirty (or not dirty) folios dat's the trouble!

Thanks for the correction!  Could it happen with anon THP?
They're not kept dirty from birth ... are they?