On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 01:48:46PM +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 02:49:02PM +0900, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 10:16:35PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > It's a bug in linux-next, but taking me too long to identify which
> > > commit is "to blame", so let me throw it over to you without more
> > > delay: I think __PageMovable() now needs to check !PageSlab().
> > >
> > > I had made a small experimental change somewhere, rebuilt and rebooted,
> > > was not surprised to crash once swapping and compaction came in,
> > > but was surprised to find the crash in isolate_movable_page(),
> > > called by compaction's isolate_migratepages_block().
> > >
> > > page->mapping was ffffffff811303aa, which qualifies as __PageMovable(),
> > > which expects struct movable_operations at page->mapping minus low bits.
> > > But ffffffff811303aa was the address of SLUB's rcu_free_slab(): I have
> > > CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y, so function addresses may have low bits set.
> > >
> > > Over to you! Thanks,
> > > Hugh
> >
> > Wow, didn't expect this.
> > Thank you for report!
> >
> > That should be due to commit 65505d1f2338e7
> > ("mm/sl[au]b: rearrange struct slab fields to allow larger rcu_head")
> > as now rcu_head can use some bits that shares with mapping.
> >
> > Hmm IMO we have two choices...
> >
> > 1. simply drop the commit as it's only for debugging (RCU folks may not like [1])
>
> Yeah definitely don't like this option as patches are out that depend on
> this (not yet merged though). :-)
Yeah, better to avoid that.
> > 2. make __PageMovable() to use true page flag, with approach [2])
>
> What are the drawbacks of making it a true flag?
We don't have free bit in page flags unless we free one ;)
> thanks,
>
> - Joel
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/85afd876-d8bb-0804-b2c5-48ed3055e702@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20220919125708.276864-1-42.hyeyoo@xxxxxxxxx/
--
Thanks,
Hyeonggon
