On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 1:45 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri 02-02-24 09:42:27, Yang Shi wrote: > > But if the partial range is MADV_FREE, khugepaged won't skip them. > > This is what your second test case does. > > > > Secondly, I think it depends on the semantics of MADV_FREE, > > particularly how to treat the redirtied pages. TBH I'm always confused > > by the semantics. For example, the page contained "abcd", then it was > > MADV_FREE'ed, then it was written again with "1234" after "abcd". So > > the user should expect to see "abcd1234" or "00001234". > > Correct. You cannot assume the content of the first page as it could > have been reclaimed at any time. > > > I'm supposed it should be "abcd1234" since MADV_FREE pages are still > > valid and available, if I'm wrong please feel free to correct me. If > > so we should always copy MADV_FREE pages in khugepaged regardless of > > whether it is redirtied or not otherwise it may incur data corruption. > > If we don't copy, then the follow up redirty after collapse to the > > hugepage may return "00001234", right? > > Right. As pointed above this is a valid outcome if the page has been > dropped. User has means to tell that from /proc/vmstat though. Not in a > great precision but I think it would be really surprising to not see any > pglazyfreed yet the content is gone. I think it would be legit to call > it a bug. One could argue the bug would be in the accounting rather than > the khugepaged implementation because madvised pages could be dropped at > any time. But I think it makes more sense to copy the existing content. Yeah, as long as khugepaged sees the MADV_FREE pages, it means they have "NOT" been dropped yet. It may be dropped later if memory pressure occurs, but anyway khugepaged wins the race and khugepaged can't assume the pages will be dropped before they get redirtied. So copying the content does make sense. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs
