On 17 Apr 2018, at 15:00, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 17-04-18 22:28:33, Li Wang wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 10:14 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue 17-04-18 15:03:00, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Tue 17-04-18 19:06:15, Li Wang wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
>>>>> index f65dd69..2b315fc 100644
>>>>> --- a/mm/migrate.c
>>>>> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
>>>>> @@ -1608,7 +1608,7 @@ static int do_pages_move(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>> nodemask_t task_nodes,
>>>>> continue;
>>>>>
>>>>> err = store_status(status, i, err, 1);
>>>>> - if (err)
>>>>> + if (!err)
>>>>> goto out_flush;
>>>>
>>>> This change just doesn't make any sense to me. Why should we bail out if
>>>> the store_status is successul? I am trying to wrap my head around the
>>>> test case. 6b9d757ecafc ("mm, numa: rework do_pages_move") tried to
>>>> explain that move_pages has some semantic issues and the new
>>>> implementation might be not 100% replacement. Anyway I am studying the
>>>> test case to come up with a proper fix.
>>>
>>> OK, I get what the test cases does. I've failed to see the subtle
>>> difference between alloc_pages_on_node and numa_alloc_onnode. The later
>>> doesn't faul in anything.
>>>
>>> Why are we getting EPERM is quite not yet clear to me.
>>> add_page_for_migration uses FOLL_DUMP which should return EFAULT on
>>> zero pages (no_page_table()).
>>>
>>> err = PTR_ERR(page);
>>> if (IS_ERR(page))
>>> goto out;
>>>
>>> therefore bails out from add_page_for_migration and store_status should
>>> store that value. There shouldn't be any EPERM on the way.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I print the the return value and confirmed the
>> add_page_for_migration()
>> do right things for zero page. and after store_status(...) the status saves
>> -EFAULT.
>> So I did the change above.
>
> OK, I guess I knnow what is going on. I must be overwriting the status
> on the way out by
>
> out_flush:
> /* Make sure we do not overwrite the existing error */
> err1 = do_move_pages_to_node(mm, &pagelist, current_node);
> if (!err1)
> err1 = store_status(status, start, current_node, i - start);
>
> This error handling is rather fragile and I was quite unhappy about it
> at the time I was developing it. I have to remember all the details why
> I've done it that way but I would bet my hat this is it. More on this
> tomorrow.
Hi Michal and Li,
The problem is that the variable start is not set properly after store_status(),
like the "start = i;" after the first store_status().
The following patch should fix the problem (it has passed all move_pages test cases from ltp
on my machine):
diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
index f65dd69e1fd1..32afa4723e7f 100644
--- a/mm/migrate.c
+++ b/mm/migrate.c
@@ -1619,6 +1619,8 @@ static int do_pages_move(struct mm_struct *mm, nodemask_t task_nodes,
if (err)
goto out;
}
+ /* Move to next page (i+1), after we have saved page status (until i) */
+ start = i + 1;
current_node = NUMA_NO_NODE;
}
out_flush:
Feel free to check it by yourselves.
--
Best Regards
Yan Zi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
