Re: [PATCH] hugetlb: do not use vma_hugecache_offset forvma_prio_tree_foreach
From: Michal Hocko
Date: Mon Oct 01 2012 - 12:22:31 EST
On Wed 26-09-12 16:56:17, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:55:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > 0c176d5 (mm: hugetlb: fix pgoff computation when unmapping page
> > from vma) fixed pgoff calculation but it has replaced it by
> > vma_hugecache_offset which is not approapriate for offsets used for
> > vma_prio_tree_foreach because that one expects index in page units
> > rather than in huge_page_shift.
> > Using vma_hugecache_offset is not incorrect because the pgoff will fit
> > into the same vmas but it is confusing so the standard PAGE_SHIFT based
> > index calculation is used instead.
>
> I do think it's incorrect. The resulting index may not be too big,
> but it can be too small: assume hpage size of 2M and the address to
> unmap to be 0x200000. This is regular page index 512 and hpage index
> 1. If you have a VMA that maps the file only starting at the second
> huge page, that VMAs vm_pgoff will be 512 but you ask for offset 1 and
> miss it even though it does map the page of interest. hugetlb_cow()
> will try to unmap, miss the vma, and retry the cow until the
> allocation succeeds or the skipped vma(s) go away.
>
> Unless I missed something, this should not be deferred as a cleanup.
You are right and I have totally missed this because I focused on the
other boundary too much :/ This vma_hugecache_offset is really
confusing.
Andrew has already updated the changelog so we will not get even more
confusion into the Linus tree.
Thanks for spotting this Johannes!
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/