Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
user avatar
Hugh Dickins authored
Recent changes are putting more pressure on THP deferred split queues:
under load revealing long-standing races, causing list_del corruptions,
"Bad page state"s and worse (I keep BUGs in both of those, so usually
don't get to see how badly they end up without).  The relevant recent
changes being 6.8's mTHP, 6.10's mTHP swapout, and 6.12's mTHP swapin,
improved swap allocation, and underused THP splitting.

Before fixing locking: rename misleading folio_undo_large_rmappable(),
which does not undo large_rmappable, to folio_unqueue_deferred_split(),
which is what it does.  But that and its out-of-line __callee are mm
internals of very limited usability: add comment and WARN_ON_ONCEs to
check usage; and return a bool to say if a deferred split was unqueued,
which can then be used in WARN_ON_ONCEs around safety checks (sparing
callers the arcane conditionals in __folio_unqueue_deferred_split()).

Just omit the folio_unqueue_deferred_split() from free_unref_folios(), all
of whose callers now call it beforehand (and if any forget then bad_page()
will tell) - except for its caller put_pages_list(), which itself no
longer has any callers (and will be deleted separately).

Swapout: mem_cgroup_swapout() has been resetting folio->memcg_data 0
without checking and unqueueing a THP folio from deferred split list;
which is unfortunate, since the split_queue_lock depends on the memcg
(when memcg is enabled); so swapout has been unqueueing such THPs later,
when freeing the folio, using the pgdat's lock instead: potentially
corrupting the memcg's list.  __remove_mapping() has frozen refcount to 0
here, so no problem with calling folio_unqueue_deferred_split() before
resetting memcg_data.

That goes back to 5.4 commit 87eaceb3 ("mm: thp: make deferred split
shrinker memcg aware"): which included a check on swapcache before adding
to deferred queue, but no check on deferred queue before adding THP to
swapcache.  That worked fine with the usual sequence of events in reclaim
(though there were a couple of rare ways in which a THP on deferred queue
could have been swapped out), but 6.12 commit dafff3f4 ("mm: split
underused THPs") avoids splitting underused THPs in reclaim, which makes
swapcache THPs on deferred queue commonplace.

Keep the check on swapcache before adding to deferred queue?  Yes: it is
no longer essential, but preserves the existing behaviour, and is likely
to be a worthwhile optimization (vmstat showed much more traffic on the
queue under swapping load if the check was removed); update its comment.

Memcg-v1 move (deprecated): mem_cgroup_move_account() has been changing
folio->memcg_data without checking and unqueueing a THP folio from the
deferred list, sometimes corrupting "from" memcg's list, like swapout.
Refcount is non-zero here, so folio_unqueue_deferred_split() can only be
used in a WARN_ON_ONCE to validate the fix, which must be done earlier:
mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range() first try to split the THP (splitting
of course unqueues), or skip it if that fails.  Not ideal, but moving
charge has been requested, and khugepaged should repair the THP later:
nobody wants new custom unqueueing code just for this deprecated case.

The 87eaceb3 commit did have the code to move from one deferred list
to another (but was not conscious of its unsafety while refcount non-0);
but that was removed by 5.6 commit fac0516b ("mm: thp: don't need care
deferred split queue in memcg charge move path"), which argued that the
existence of a PMD mapping guarantees that the THP cannot be on a deferred
list.  As above, false in rare cases, and now commonly false.

Backport to 6.11 should be straightforward.  Earlier backports must take
care that other _deferred_list fixes and dependencies are included.  There
is not a strong case for backports, but they can fix cornercases.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/8dc111ae-f6db-2da7-b25c-7a20b1effe3b@google.com


Fixes: 87eaceb3 ("mm: thp: make deferred split shrinker memcg aware")
Fixes: dafff3f4 ("mm: split underused THPs")
Change-Id: I86d7fcd68ca35171b679c76ad2a1e21584417fc6
Signed-off-by: default avatarHugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Acked-by: default avatarDavid Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarYang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>
Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Cc: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
(cherry picked from commit f8f931bb)
Bug: 378967818
Bug: 399794577
[ Fix conflict in mem_cgroup_move_account() in file memcontrol-v1.c
and trivial conflict with renaming of function folio_unqueue_deferred_split()
- yan Chang ]
Signed-off-by: default avataryan Chang <changyan1@xiaomi.com>
b346d6be

How do I submit patches to Android Common Kernels

  1. BEST: Make all of your changes to upstream Linux. If appropriate, backport to the stable releases. These patches will be merged automatically in the corresponding common kernels. If the patch is already in upstream Linux, post a backport of the patch that conforms to the patch requirements below.

    • Do not send patches upstream that contain only symbol exports. To be considered for upstream Linux, additions of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() require an in-tree modular driver that uses the symbol -- so include the new driver or changes to an existing driver in the same patchset as the export.
    • When sending patches upstream, the commit message must contain a clear case for why the patch is needed and beneficial to the community. Enabling out-of-tree drivers or functionality is not a persuasive case.
  2. LESS GOOD: Develop your patches out-of-tree (from an upstream Linux point-of-view). Unless these are fixing an Android-specific bug, these are very unlikely to be accepted unless they have been coordinated with kernel-team@android.com. If you want to proceed, post a patch that conforms to the patch requirements below.

Common Kernel patch requirements

  • All patches must conform to the Linux kernel coding standards and pass scripts/checkpatch.pl
  • Patches shall not break gki_defconfig or allmodconfig builds for arm, arm64, x86, x86_64 architectures (see https://source.android.com/setup/build/building-kernels)
  • If the patch is not merged from an upstream branch, the subject must be tagged with the type of patch: UPSTREAM:, BACKPORT:, FROMGIT:, FROMLIST:, or ANDROID:.
  • All patches must have a Change-Id: tag (see https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/user-changeid.html)
  • If an Android bug has been assigned, there must be a Bug: tag.
  • All patches must have a Signed-off-by: tag by the author and the submitter

Additional requirements are listed below based on patch type

Requirements for backports from mainline Linux: UPSTREAM:, BACKPORT:

  • If the patch is a cherry-pick from Linux mainline with no changes at all
    • tag the patch subject with UPSTREAM:.
    • add upstream commit information with a (cherry picked from commit ...) line
    • Example:
      • if the upstream commit message is
        important patch from upstream

        This is the detailed description of the important patch

        Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
  • then Joe Smith would upload the patch for the common kernel as
        UPSTREAM: important patch from upstream

        This is the detailed description of the important patch

        Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>

        Bug: 135791357
        Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
        (cherry picked from commit c31e73121f4c1ec41143423ac6ce3ce6dafdcec1)
        Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
  • If the patch requires any changes from the upstream version, tag the patch with BACKPORT: instead of UPSTREAM:.
    • use the same tags as UPSTREAM:
    • add comments about the changes under the (cherry picked from commit ...) line
    • Example:
        BACKPORT: important patch from upstream

        This is the detailed description of the important patch

        Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>

        Bug: 135791357
        Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
        (cherry picked from commit c31e73121f4c1ec41143423ac6ce3ce6dafdcec1)
        [joe: Resolved minor conflict in drivers/foo/bar.c ]
        Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>

Requirements for other backports: FROMGIT:, FROMLIST:,

  • If the patch has been merged into an upstream maintainer tree, but has not yet been merged into Linux mainline
    • tag the patch subject with FROMGIT:
    • add info on where the patch came from as (cherry picked from commit <sha1> <repo> <branch>). This must be a stable maintainer branch (not rebased, so don't use linux-next for example).
    • if changes were required, use BACKPORT: FROMGIT:
    • Example:
      • if the commit message in the maintainer tree is
        important patch from upstream

        This is the detailed description of the important patch

        Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
  • then Joe Smith would upload the patch for the common kernel as
        FROMGIT: important patch from upstream

        This is the detailed description of the important patch

        Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>

        Bug: 135791357
        (cherry picked from commit 878a2fd9de10b03d11d2f622250285c7e63deace
         https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/foo/bar.git test-branch)
        Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
        Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
  • If the patch has been submitted to LKML, but not accepted into any maintainer tree
    • tag the patch subject with FROMLIST:
    • add a Link: tag with a link to the submittal on lore.kernel.org
    • add a Bug: tag with the Android bug (required for patches not accepted into a maintainer tree)
    • if changes were required, use BACKPORT: FROMLIST:
    • Example:
        FROMLIST: important patch from upstream

        This is the detailed description of the important patch

        Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>

        Bug: 135791357
        Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190619171517.GA17557@someone.com/
        Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
        Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>

Requirements for Android-specific patches: ANDROID:

  • If the patch is fixing a bug to Android-specific code
    • tag the patch subject with ANDROID:
    • add a Fixes: tag that cites the patch with the bug
    • Example:
        ANDROID: fix android-specific bug in foobar.c

        This is the detailed description of the important fix

        Fixes: 1234abcd2468 ("foobar: add cool feature")
        Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
        Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
  • If the patch is a new feature
    • tag the patch subject with ANDROID:
    • add a Bug: tag with the Android bug (required for android-specific features)