On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 02:43:58PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 01:34:39PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:07:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Tue 15-07-14 11:55:37, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:40:45PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c > > > > > index a98f48626359..3074210f245d 100644 > > > > > --- a/mm/swap.c > > > > > +++ b/mm/swap.c > > > > > @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ static void __page_cache_release(struct page *page) > > > > > del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec, page_off_lru(page)); > > > > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lru_lock, flags); > > > > > } > > > > > + mem_cgroup_uncharge(page); > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > static void __put_single_page(struct page *page) > > > > > > > > This seems to cause a list breakage in hstate->hugepage_activelist > > > > when freeing a hugetlbfs page. > > > > > > This looks like a fall out from > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=140475936311294&w=2 > > > > > > I didn't get to review this one but the easiest fix seems to be check > > > HugePage and do not call uncharge. > > > > Yes, that makes sense. I'm also moving the uncharge call into > > __put_single_page() and __put_compound_page() so that PageHuge(), a > > function call, only needs to be checked for compound pages. > > > > > > For hugetlbfs, we uncharge in free_huge_page() which is called after > > > > __page_cache_release(), so I think that we don't have to uncharge here. > > > > > > > > In my testing, moving mem_cgroup_uncharge() inside if (PageLRU) block > > > > fixed the problem, so if that works for you, could you fold the change > > > > into your patch? > > > > Memcg pages that *do* need uncharging might not necessarily be on the > > LRU list. > > OK. > > > Does the following work for you? > > Unfortunately, with this change I saw the following bug message when > stressing with hugepage migration. > move_to_new_page() is called by unmap_and_move_huge_page() too, so > we need some hugetlb related code around mem_cgroup_migrate(). Can we just move hugetlb_cgroup_migrate() into move_to_new_page()? It doesn't seem to be dependent of any page-specific state. diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c index 7f5a42403fae..219da52d2f43 100644 --- a/mm/migrate.c +++ b/mm/migrate.c @@ -781,7 +781,10 @@ static int move_to_new_page(struct page *newpage, struct page *page, if (!PageAnon(newpage)) newpage->mapping = NULL; } else { - mem_cgroup_migrate(page, newpage, false); + if (PageHuge(page)) + hugetlb_cgroup_migrate(hpage, new_hpage); + else + mem_cgroup_migrate(page, newpage, false); if (remap_swapcache) remove_migration_ptes(page, newpage); if (!PageAnon(page)) @@ -1064,9 +1067,6 @@ static int unmap_and_move_huge_page(new_page_t get_new_page, if (anon_vma) put_anon_vma(anon_vma); - if (rc == MIGRATEPAGE_SUCCESS) - hugetlb_cgroup_migrate(hpage, new_hpage); - unlock_page(hpage); out: if (rc != -EAGAIN) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>