Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1402836

Re: [PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of page->flags for hwpoison page

From Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of page->flags for hwpoison page
Date 2016-05-18 11:40 +0200
Message-ID <rA67n-eQ-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <rzHVo-1FI-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <rA5XI-aM-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On 05/18/2016 11:21 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 04:42:55PM +0900, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
>> There's a race window between checking page->flags and unpoisoning, which
>> taints kernel with "BUG: Bad page state". That's overkill. It's safer to
>> use bad_flags to detect hwpoisoned page.
>>
>
> I'm not quite getting this one. Minimally, instead of = __PG_HWPOISON, it
> should have been (bad_flags & __PG_POISON). As Vlastimil already pointed
> out, __PG_HWPOISON can be 0. What I'm not getting is why this fixes the
> race. The current race is
>
> 1. Check poison, set bad_flags
> 2. poison clears in parallel
> 3. Check page->flag state in bad_page and trigger warning
>
> The code changes it to
>
> 1. Check poison, set bad_flags
> 2. poison clears in parallel
> 3. Check bad_flags and trigger warning

I think you got step 3 here wrong. It's "skip the warning since we have 
set bad_flags to hwpoison and bad_flags didn't change due to parallel 
unpoison".

Perhaps the question is why do we need to split the handling between 
check_new_page_bad() and bad_page() like this? It might have been 
different in the past, but seems like at this point we only look for 
hwpoison from check_new_page_bad(). But a cleanup can come later.

> There is warning either way. What did I miss?
>

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of page->flags for hwpoison page Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> - 2016-05-17 09:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of page->flags  for hwpoison page Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-05-18 09:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of  page->flags for hwpoison page Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-05-18 11:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of page->flags  for hwpoison page Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-05-18 11:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of  page->flags for hwpoison page Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-05-18 12:00 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v1] mm: bad_page() checks bad_flags instead of  page->flags for hwpoison page Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> - 2016-05-18 12:20 +0200
      [PATCH v2] mm: check_new_page_bad() directly returns in  __PG_HWPOISON case Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> - 2016-05-18 12:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v2] mm: check_new_page_bad() directly returns in  __PG_HWPOISON case Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-05-18 16:10 +0200
          Re: [PATCH v2] mm: check_new_page_bad() directly returns in  __PG_HWPOISON case Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-05-20 16:30 +0200

csiph-web