On 4/12/22 5:09 PM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 10:18:26AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
On 2022/4/10 23:22, Xu Yu wrote:
Kernel panic when injecting memory_failure for the global huge_zero_page,
when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled, as follows.
[ 5.582720] Injecting memory failure for pfn 0x109ff9 at process virtual address 0x20ff9000
[ 5.583786] page:00000000fb053fc3 refcount:2 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x109e00
[ 5.584900] head:00000000fb053fc3 order:9 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0
[ 5.585796] flags: 0x17fffc000010001(locked|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff)
[ 5.586712] raw: 017fffc000010001 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000
[ 5.587640] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000002ffffffff 0000000000000000
[ 5.588565] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(is_huge_zero_page(head))
[ 5.589398] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 5.589952] kernel BUG at mm/huge_memory.c:2499!
[ 5.590516] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI
[ 5.591120] CPU: 6 PID: 553 Comm: split_bug Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1+ #11
[ 5.591904] Hardware name: Alibaba Cloud Alibaba Cloud ECS, BIOS 3288b3c 04/01/2014
[ 5.592817] RIP: 0010:split_huge_page_to_list+0x66a/0x880
[ 5.593469] Code: 84 9b fb ff ff 48 8b 7c 24 08 31 f6 e8 9f 5d 2a 00 b8 b8 02 00 00 e9 e8 fb ff ff 48 c7 c6 e8 47 3c 82 4c b
[ 5.595806] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000dcbdf8 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 5.596434] RAX: 000000000000003c RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000000000
[ 5.597322] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff823e4c4f RDI: 00000000ffffffff
[ 5.598162] RBP: ffff88843fffdb40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000fffeffff
[ 5.598999] R10: ffffc90000dcbc48 R11: ffffffff82d68448 R12: ffffea0004278000
[ 5.599849] R13: ffffffff823c6203 R14: 0000000000109ff9 R15: ffffea000427fe40
[ 5.600693] FS: 00007fc375a26740(0000) GS:ffff88842fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 5.601640] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 5.602304] CR2: 00007fc3757c9290 CR3: 0000000102174006 CR4: 00000000003706e0
[ 5.603139] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 5.603977] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 5.604806] Call Trace:
[ 5.605101] <TASK>
[ 5.605357] ? __irq_work_queue_local+0x39/0x70
[ 5.605904] try_to_split_thp_page+0x3a/0x130
[ 5.606430] memory_failure+0x128/0x800
[ 5.606888] madvise_inject_error.cold+0x8b/0xa1
[ 5.607444] __x64_sys_madvise+0x54/0x60
[ 5.607915] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80
[ 5.608347] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 5.608949] RIP: 0033:0x7fc3754f8bf9
[ 5.609374] Code: 01 00 48 81 c4 80 00 00 00 e9 f1 fe ff ff 0f 1f 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 8
[ 5.611554] RSP: 002b:00007ffeda93a1d8 EFLAGS: 00000217 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c
[ 5.612441] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fc3754f8bf9
[ 5.613269] RDX: 0000000000000064 RSI: 0000000000003000 RDI: 0000000020ff9000
[ 5.614108] RBP: 00007ffeda93a200 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
[ 5.614946] R10: 00000000ffffffff R11: 0000000000000217 R12: 0000000000400490
[ 5.615787] R13: 00007ffeda93a2e0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
[ 5.616626] </TASK>
Thanks for the report and the patch!
I remember I and Naoya discussed the try_to_split_thp_page in memory_failure might come
across non-lru movable compound page and huge_zero_page. We fixed the non-lru movable
compound page case but conclude huge_zero_page won't reach here due to the HWPoisonHandlable()
check. But we missed the MF_COUNT_INCREASED case where HWPoisonHandlable() is skipped.
In fact, huge_zero_page is unhandlable currently in either soft offline
or memory failure injection. With CONFIG_DEBUG_VM disabled,
huge_zero_page is bailed out when checking HWPoisonHandlable() in
get_any_page(), or checking page mapping in split_huge_page_to_list().
This makes huge_zero_page bail out early in madvise_inject_error(), and
panic above won't happen again.
It seems this issue is expected to happen only in madvise_inject_error case because
MF_COUNT_INCREASED is only set here. So this fix should do the right thing. But I
don't know whether bail out early for huge_zero_page is suitable.
Hi Naoya, what do you think?
Thank you for reporting.
...
@@ -1087,12 +1087,21 @@ static int madvise_inject_error(int behavior,
return ret;
pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
+ head = compound_head(page);
+ if (unlikely(is_huge_zero_page(head))) {
+ pr_warn("Unhandlable attempt to %s pfn %#lx at process virtual address %#lx\n",
+ behavior == MADV_SOFT_OFFLINE ? "soft offline" :
+ "inject memory failure for",
+ pfn, start);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
This check is about the detail of error handling, so I feel it desirable to
do this in memory_failure(). And memory errors on huge zero page is the
real scenario, so it seems to me better to make this case injectable rather
than EINVAL.
How about checking is_huge_zero_page() before try_to_split_thp_page()?
The result should be consistent with the results when called by other
memory_failure()'s callers like MCE handler and hard_offline_page_store().
Agree. thanks!
diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
index 9b76222ee237..771fb4fc626c 100644
--- a/mm/memory-failure.c
+++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
@@ -1852,6 +1852,12 @@ int memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int flags)
}
if (PageTransHuge(hpage)) {
+ if (is_huge_zero_page(hpage)) {
+ action_result(pfn, MF_MSG_KERNEL_HIGH_ORDER, MF_IGNORED);
Should we use MF_MSG_UNSPLIT_THP instead of MF_MSG_KERNEL_HIGH_ORDER?
And should we SetPageHasHWPoisoned(hpage) for huge zero page, since
TestSetPageHWPoison(p) is done in the early part of memory_failure().
+ res = -EBUSY;
+ goto unlock_mutex;
+ }
+
/*
* The flag must be set after the refcount is bumped
* otherwise it may race with THP split.
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
--
Thanks,
Yu
