On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 12:39:10PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 8 Jul 2024, at 11:52, Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:06:20PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >> I hit the VM_BUG_ON(!list_empty(&cc->migratepages)) in compact_zone();
> >> and if DEBUG_VM were off, then pages would be lost on a local list.
> >>
> >> Our convention is that if migrate_pages() reports complete success (0),
> >> then the migratepages list will be empty; but if it reports an error or
> >> some pages remaining, then its caller must putback_movable_pages().
> >>
> >> There's a new case in which migrate_pages() has been reporting complete
> >> success, but returning with pages left on the migratepages list: when
> >> migrate_pages_batch() successfully split a folio on the deferred list,
> >> but then the "Failure isn't counted" call does not dispose of them all.
> >>
> >> Since that block is expecting the large folio to have been counted as 1
> >> failure already, and since the return code is later adjusted to success
> >> whenever the returned list is found empty, the simple way to fix this
> >> safely is to count splitting the deferred folio as "a failure".
> >>
> >> Fixes: 7262f208ca68 ("mm/migrate: split source folio if it is on deferred split list")
> >> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> A hotfix to 6.10-rc, not needed for stable.
> >>
> >> mm/migrate.c | 8 +++++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> --- a/mm/migrate.c
> >> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> >> @@ -1654,7 +1654,12 @@ static int migrate_pages_batch(struct list_head *from,
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * The rare folio on the deferred split list should
> >> - * be split now. It should not count as a failure.
> >> + * be split now. It should not count as a failure:
> >> + * but increment nr_failed because, without doing so,
> >> + * migrate_pages() may report success with (split but
> >> + * unmigrated) pages still on its fromlist; whereas it
> >> + * always reports success when its fromlist is empty.
> >> + *
> >> * Only check it without removing it from the list.
> >> * Since the folio can be on deferred_split_scan()
> >> * local list and removing it can cause the local list
> >> @@ -1669,6 +1674,7 @@ static int migrate_pages_batch(struct list_head *from,
> >> if (nr_pages > 2 &&
> >> !list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list)) {
> >> if (try_split_folio(folio, split_folios) == 0) {
> >> + nr_failed++;
> >> stats->nr_thp_split += is_thp;
> >> stats->nr_split++;
> >> continue;
> >> --
> >> 2.35.3
> >>
> >>
> >
> > We probably hit the same issue in our testbeds, but in the other
> > migrate_misplaced_folio() path, which contains the BUG_ON() rather than
> > VM_BUG_ON(). Looks like this patch can also fix that.
> >
> > When looking at that, I wonder whether we overlooked one more spot where we
> > mostly always use putback_movable_pages() for migrate failures, but didn't
> > in migrate_misplaced_folio(). I feel like it was overlooked but want to
> > check with all of you here, as I do think the folio can already be split
> > when reaching here too. So I wonder whether below would make sense as a fix
> > from that POV.
> >
> > ===8<===
> > diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
> > index e10d2445fbd8..20da2595527a 100644
> > --- a/mm/migrate.c
> > +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> > @@ -2615,14 +2615,8 @@ int migrate_misplaced_folio(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > nr_remaining = migrate_pages(&migratepages, alloc_misplaced_dst_folio,
> > NULL, node, MIGRATE_ASYNC,
> > MR_NUMA_MISPLACED, &nr_succeeded);
> > - if (nr_remaining) {
> > - if (!list_empty(&migratepages)) {
> > - list_del(&folio->lru);
> > - node_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> > - folio_is_file_lru(folio), -nr_pages);
> > - folio_putback_lru(folio);
> > - }
> > - }
> > + if (nr_remaining && !list_empty(&migratepages))
> > + putback_movable_pages(&migratepages);
> > if (nr_succeeded) {
> > count_vm_numa_events(NUMA_PAGE_MIGRATE, nr_succeeded);
> > if (!node_is_toptier(folio_nid(folio)) && node_is_toptier(node))
> > ===8<===
>
> If the original folio is large and split without migrating all subpages,
> not migrated sub pages will be left on migratepages list. list_del(&folio->lru)
> can remove the first subpage from a wrong list, if it is migrated, and loses
> the rest. It is not a problem before, since MR_NUMA_MISPLACED prevents the
> folio from being split.
>
> The fix looks good to me.
Thanks, Zi. Let me send a formal patch then.
--
Peter Xu
