From e3b7bf972d632288ccad95b116628e3141be676e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tarun Sahu Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 21:59:07 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] mm/folio: avoid special handling for order value 0 in folio_set_order folio_set_order(folio, 0) is used in kernel at two places __destroy_compound_gigantic_folio and __prep_compound_gigantic_folio. Currently, It is called to clear out the folio->_folio_nr_pages and folio->_folio_order. For __destroy_compound_gigantic_folio: In past, folio_set_order(folio, 0) was needed because page->mapping used to overlap with _folio_nr_pages and _folio_order. So if these fields were left uncleared during freeing gigantic hugepages, they were causing "BUG: bad page state" due to non-zero page->mapping. Now, After Commit a01f43901cfb ("hugetlb: be sure to free demoted CMA pages to CMA") page->mapping has explicitly been cleared out for tail pages. Also, _folio_order and _folio_nr_pages no longer overlaps with page->mapping. So, folio_set_order(folio, 0) can be removed from freeing gigantic folio path (__destroy_compound_gigantic_folio). Another place, folio_set_order(folio, 0) is called inside __prep_compound_gigantic_folio during error path. Here, folio_set_order(folio, 0) can also be removed if we move folio_set_order(folio, order) after for loop. The patch also moves _folio_set_head call in __prep_compound_gigantic_folio() such that we avoid clearing them in the error path. Also, as Mike pointed out: "It would actually be better to move the calls _folio_set_head and folio_set_order in __prep_compound_gigantic_folio() as suggested here. Why? In the current code, the ref count on the 'head page' is still 1 (or more) while those calls are made. So, someone could take a speculative ref on the page BEFORE the tail pages are set up." This way, folio_set_order(folio, 0) is no more needed. And it will also helps removing the confusion of folio order being set to 0 (as _folio_order field is part of first tail page). Testing: I have run LTP tests, which all passes. and also I have written the test in LTP which tests the bug caused by compound_nr and page->mapping overlapping. https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/hugemmap32.c Running on older kernel ( < 5.10-rc7) with the above bug this fails while on newer kernel and, also with this patch it passes. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230609162907.111756-1-tsahu@linux.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Tarun Sahu Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V Cc: Gerald Schaefer Cc: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Muchun Song Cc: Sidhartha Kumar Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- mm/hugetlb.c | 9 +++------ mm/internal.h | 8 ++------ 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c index dfa412d..de96cd9 100644 --- a/mm/hugetlb.c +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c @@ -1489,7 +1489,6 @@ static void __destroy_compound_gigantic_folio(struct folio *folio, set_page_refcounted(p); } - folio_set_order(folio, 0); __folio_clear_head(folio); } @@ -1951,9 +1950,6 @@ static bool __prep_compound_gigantic_folio(struct folio *folio, struct page *p; __folio_clear_reserved(folio); - __folio_set_head(folio); - /* we rely on prep_new_hugetlb_folio to set the destructor */ - folio_set_order(folio, order); for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) { p = folio_page(folio, i); @@ -1999,6 +1995,9 @@ static bool __prep_compound_gigantic_folio(struct folio *folio, if (i != 0) set_compound_head(p, &folio->page); } + __folio_set_head(folio); + /* we rely on prep_new_hugetlb_folio to set the destructor */ + folio_set_order(folio, order); atomic_set(&folio->_entire_mapcount, -1); atomic_set(&folio->_nr_pages_mapped, 0); atomic_set(&folio->_pincount, 0); @@ -2017,8 +2016,6 @@ out_error: p = folio_page(folio, j); __ClearPageReserved(p); } - folio_set_order(folio, 0); - __folio_clear_head(folio); return false; } diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h index f45f5eb..faf0508 100644 --- a/mm/internal.h +++ b/mm/internal.h @@ -438,16 +438,12 @@ int split_free_page(struct page *free_page, */ static inline void folio_set_order(struct folio *folio, unsigned int order) { - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!folio_test_large(folio))) + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!order || !folio_test_large(folio))) return; folio->_folio_order = order; #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT - /* - * When hugetlb dissolves a folio, we need to clear the tail - * page, rather than setting nr_pages to 1. - */ - folio->_folio_nr_pages = order ? 1U << order : 0; + folio->_folio_nr_pages = 1U << order; #endif } -- 2.7.4