Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-206895-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Message-ID: <2821278f-bc94-c147-d0fe-8cc52dbdccb1@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2024 07:08:35 +0300
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: zswap: handle incorrect attempts to load of large
 folios
Content-Language: en-US
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>,
 Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>,
 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>, Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>,
 Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
 David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
 linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240608023654.3513385-1-yosryahmed@google.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mika_Penttil=c3=a4?= <mpenttil@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240608023654.3513385-1-yosryahmed@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 6/8/24 05:36, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/zswap.c b/mm/zswap.c
> index b9b35ef86d9be..ebb878d3e7865 100644
> --- a/mm/zswap.c
> +++ b/mm/zswap.c
> @@ -1557,6 +1557,26 @@ bool zswap_load(struct folio *folio)
>  
>  	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!folio_test_locked(folio));
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Large folios should not be swapped in while zswap is being used, as
> +	 * they are not properly handled. Zswap does not properly load large
> +	 * folios, and a large folio may only be partially in zswap.
> +	 *
> +	 * If any of the subpages are in zswap, reading from disk would result
> +	 * in data corruption, so return true without marking the folio uptodate
> +	 * so that an IO error is emitted (e.g. do_swap_page() will sigfault).
> +	 *
> +	 * Otherwise, return false and read the folio from disk.
> +	 */
> +	if (folio_test_large(folio)) {
> +		if (xa_find(tree, &offset,
> +			    offset + folio_nr_pages(folio) - 1, XA_PRESENT)) {
> +			WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> +			return true;
> +		}

How does that work? Should it be xa_find_after() to not always find
current entry?

And does it still mean those subsequent entries map to same folio?


--Mika