lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/7] mm/hmm: properly handle migration pmd
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:54:33AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On 28 Aug 2018, at 11:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > On Tue 28-08-18 17:42:06, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> On Tue 28-08-18 11:36:59, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 05:24:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>>> On Fri 24-08-18 20:05:46, Zi Yan wrote:
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>>> + if (!pmd_present(pmd)) {
> >>>>>> + swp_entry_t entry = pmd_to_swp_entry(pmd);
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> + if (is_migration_entry(entry)) {
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think you should check thp_migration_supported() here, since PMD migration is only enabled in x86_64 systems.
> >>>>> Other architectures should treat PMD migration entries as bad.
> >>>>
> >>>> How can we have a migration pmd entry when the migration is not
> >>>> supported?
> >>>
> >>> Not sure i follow here, migration can happen anywhere (assuming
> >>> that something like compaction is active or numa or ...). So this
> >>> code can face pmd migration entry on architecture that support
> >>> it. What is missing here is thp_migration_supported() call to
> >>> protect the is_migration_entry() to avoid false positive on arch
> >>> which do not support thp migration.
> >>
> >> I mean that architectures which do not support THP migration shouldn't
> >> ever see any migration entry. So is_migration_entry should be always
> >> false. Or do I miss something?
> >
> > And just to be clear. thp_migration_supported should be checked only
> > when we actually _do_ the migration or evaluate migratability of the
> > page. We definitely do want to sprinkle this check to all places where
> > is_migration_entry is checked.
>
> is_migration_entry() is a general check for swp_entry_t, so it can return
> true even if THP migration is not enabled. is_pmd_migration_entry() always
> returns false when THP migration is not enabled.
>
> So the code can be changed in two ways, either replacing is_migration_entry()
> with is_pmd_migration_entry() or adding thp_migration_supported() check
> like Jerome did.
>
> Does this clarify your question?
>

Well looking back at code is_migration_entry() will return false on arch
which do not have thp migration because pmd_to_swp_entry() will return
swp_entry(0,0) which is can not be a valid migration entry.

Maybe using is_pmd_migration_entry() would be better here ? It seems
that is_pmd_migration_entry() is more common then the open coded
thp_migration_supported() && is_migration_entry()

Cheers,
Jérôme

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-28 18:06    [W:0.056 / U:0.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site