On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 13:22:42 +0800 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 8/21/2022 5:17 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:37:43 +0800 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> The pmd_huge() is used to validate if the pmd entry is mapped by a huge
> >> page, also including the case of non-present (migration or hwpoisoned)
> >> pmd entry on arm64 or x86 architectures. That means the pmd_pfn() can
> >> not get the correct pfn number for the non-present pmd entry, which
> >> will cause damon_get_page() to get an incorrect page struct (also
> >> may be NULL by pfn_to_online_page()) to make the access statistics
> >> incorrect.
> >>
> >> Moreover it does not make sense that we still waste time to get the
> >> page of the non-present entry, just treat it as not-accessed and skip it,
> >> that keeps consistent with non-present pte level entry.
> >>
> >> Thus adding a pmd entry present validation to fix above issues.
> >>
> >
> > Do we have a Fixes: for this?
>
> OK, should be:
> Fixes: 3f49584b262c ("mm/damon: implement primitives for the virtual
> memory address spaces")
>
> > What are the user-visible runtime effects of the bug? "make the access
> > statistics incorrect" is rather vague.
>
> "access statistics incorrect" means that the DAMON may make incorrect
> decision according to the incorrect statistics, for example, DAMON may
> can not reclaim cold page in time due to this cold page was regarded as
> accessed mistakenly if DAMOS_PAGEOUT operation is specified.
>
> > Do we feel that a cc:stable is warranted?
>
> Though this is not a regular case, I think this patch is suitable to be
> backported to cover this unusual case. So please help to add a stable
> tag when you apply this patch, or please let me know if you want a new
> version with adding Fixes and stable tags. Thanks.
Thanks, I took care of all that.
