Skip to contentSkip to conversation

mm, hwpoison: fix condition in free hugetlb page path

PATCH In review Naoya Horiguchi 2 participants 3 messages Dec 10, 2021 – Dec 20, 2021

Subsystems (2)
lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 mm, hwpoison: fix condition in free hugetlb page path

From: Naoya Horiguchi <[email protected]>

When a memory error hits a tail page of a free hugepage, __page_handle_poison() is expected to be called to isolate the error in 4kB unit, but it's not called due to the outdated if-condition in memory_failure_hugetlb(). This loses the chance to isolate the error in the finer unit, so it's not optimal. Drop the condition.

This "(p != head && TestSetPageHWPoison(head)" condition is based on the old semantics of PageHWPoison on hugepage (where PG_hwpoison flag was set on the subpage), so it's not necessray any more. By getting to set PG_hwpoison on head page for hugepages, concurrent error events on different subpages in a single hugepage can be prevented by TestSetPageHWPoison(head) at the beginning of memory_failure_hugetlb(). So dropping the condition should not reopen the race window originally mentioned in commit b985194c8c0a ("hwpoison, hugetlb:
lock_page/unlock_page does not match for handling a free hugepage")

---
I set v5.14+ for stable trees because the base code was greatly changed by commit 0ed950d1f281 ("mm,hwpoison: make get_hwpoison_page() call get_any_page()"), and this patch is not cleanly applicable, although the original issue was introduced more previously.

---
 mm/memory-failure.c | 21 +++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
mm/memory-failure.c +7 -14
index 8f0ee5b08696..68d9a35f8908 100644
@@ -1521,24 +1521,17 @@ static int memory_failure_hugetlb(unsigned long pfn, int flags)
 	if (!(flags & MF_COUNT_INCREASED)) {
 		res = get_hwpoison_page(p, flags);
 		if (!res) {
-			/*
-			 * Check "filter hit" and "race with other subpage."
-			 */
 			lock_page(head);
-			if (PageHWPoison(head)) {
-				if ((hwpoison_filter(p) && TestClearPageHWPoison(p))
-				    || (p != head && TestSetPageHWPoison(head))) {
+			if (hwpoison_filter(p)) {
+				if (TestClearPageHWPoison(head))
 					num_poisoned_pages_dec();
-					unlock_page(head);
-					return 0;
-				}
+				unlock_page(head);
+				return 0;
 			}
 			unlock_page(head);
-			res = MF_FAILED;
-			if (__page_handle_poison(p)) {
-				page_ref_inc(p);
-				res = MF_RECOVERED;
-			}
+			res = MF_RECOVERED;
+			if (!page_handle_poison(p, true, false))
+				res = MF_FAILED;
 			action_result(pfn, MF_MSG_FREE_HUGE, res);
 			return res == MF_RECOVERED ? 0 : -EBUSY;
 		} else if (res < 0) {
Signature · 1 line
2.25.1
Reviewed-by on v1 1/1
#1 lore raw
Quoted 21 lines · Naoya Horiguchi

From: Naoya Horiguchi <[email protected]>

When a memory error hits a tail page of a free hugepage, __page_handle_poison() is expected to be called to isolate the error in 4kB unit, but it's not called due to the outdated if-condition in memory_failure_hugetlb(). This loses the chance to isolate the error in the finer unit, so it's not optimal. Drop the condition.

This "(p != head && TestSetPageHWPoison(head)" condition is based on the old semantics of PageHWPoison on hugepage (where PG_hwpoison flag was set on the subpage), so it's not necessray any more. By getting to set PG_hwpoison on head page for hugepages, concurrent error events on different subpages in a single hugepage can be prevented by TestSetPageHWPoison(head) at the beginning of memory_failure_hugetlb(). So dropping the condition should not reopen the race window originally mentioned in commit b985194c8c0a ("hwpoison, hugetlb:
lock_page/unlock_page does not match for handling a free hugepage")

Quoted 8 lines

---
I set v5.14+ for stable trees because the base code was greatly changed by commit 0ed950d1f281 ("mm,hwpoison: make get_hwpoison_page() call get_any_page()"), and this patch is not cleanly applicable, although the original issue was introduced more previously.

---
 mm/memory-failure.c | 21 +++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

Thank you Naoya!

In my spare time, I have been testing memory error code for hugetlb pages. I noticed this issue and had created similar patch.

Signature · 1 line
Mike Kravetz
#2 lore raw
In reply to Naoya Horiguchi
Quoted 53 lines · Naoya Horiguchi

From: Naoya Horiguchi <[email protected]>

When a memory error hits a tail page of a free hugepage, __page_handle_poison() is expected to be called to isolate the error in 4kB unit, but it's not called due to the outdated if-condition in memory_failure_hugetlb(). This loses the chance to isolate the error in the finer unit, so it's not optimal. Drop the condition.

This "(p != head && TestSetPageHWPoison(head)" condition is based on the old semantics of PageHWPoison on hugepage (where PG_hwpoison flag was set on the subpage), so it's not necessray any more. By getting to set PG_hwpoison on head page for hugepages, concurrent error events on different subpages in a single hugepage can be prevented by TestSetPageHWPoison(head) at the beginning of memory_failure_hugetlb(). So dropping the condition should not reopen the race window originally mentioned in commit b985194c8c0a ("hwpoison, hugetlb:
lock_page/unlock_page does not match for handling a free hugepage")

---
I set v5.14+ for stable trees because the base code was greatly changed by commit 0ed950d1f281 ("mm,hwpoison: make get_hwpoison_page() call get_any_page()"), and this patch is not cleanly applicable, although the original issue was introduced more previously.

---
 mm/memory-failure.c | 21 +++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
mm/memory-failure.c +4 -9
index 8f0ee5b08696..68d9a35f8908 100644
@@ -1521,24 +1521,17 @@ static int memory_failure_hugetlb(unsigned long pfn, int flags)
 	if (!(flags & MF_COUNT_INCREASED)) {
 		res = get_hwpoison_page(p, flags);
 		if (!res) {
-			/*
-			 * Check "filter hit" and "race with other subpage."
-			 */
 			lock_page(head);
-			if (PageHWPoison(head)) {
-				if ((hwpoison_filter(p) && TestClearPageHWPoison(p))
-				    || (p != head && TestSetPageHWPoison(head))) {
+			if (hwpoison_filter(p)) {
+				if (TestClearPageHWPoison(head))
 					num_poisoned_pages_dec();
-					unlock_page(head);
-					return 0;
-				}
+				unlock_page(head);
+				return 0;

mm/memory-failure.c static int memory_failure_hugetlb(unsigned long pfn, int flags) · line 1534

Quoted 10 lines
mm/memory-failure.c +3 -5
 			}
 			unlock_page(head);
-			res = MF_FAILED;
-			if (__page_handle_poison(p)) {
-				page_ref_inc(p);
-				res = MF_RECOVERED;
-			}
+			res = MF_RECOVERED;
+			if (!page_handle_poison(p, true, false))
+				res = MF_FAILED;

Sorry, I just found that this change broke "HardwareCorrupted" counter because page_handle_poison() calls num_poisoned_pages_inc() so the counter was incremented twice in total by a single error event. page_handle_poison() is supposed to be called only in soft-offline context, and __page_handle_poison() should be called in hard-offline context.

Andrew, could you fold the following diff on mm-hwpoison-fix-condition-in-free-hugetlb-page-path.patch in your tree? (Or if desirable, I'll send a updated full patch.)

mm/memory-failure.c +5 -3
index 68d9a35f8908..ee51d6410f9a 100644
@@ -1529,9 +1529,11 @@ static int memory_failure_hugetlb(unsigned long pfn, int flags)
 				return 0;
 			}
 			unlock_page(head);
-			res = MF_RECOVERED;
-			if (!page_handle_poison(p, true, false))
-				res = MF_FAILED;
+			res = MF_FAILED;
+			if (__page_handle_poison(p)) {
+				page_ref_inc(p);
+				res = MF_RECOVERED;
+			}
 			action_result(pfn, MF_MSG_FREE_HUGE, res);
 			return res == MF_RECOVERED ? 0 : -EBUSY;
 		} else if (res < 0) {

Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi