Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: defer free_huge_page() to a workqueue

[Michal Hocko]

On Thu 12-12-19 15:52:20, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 12/12/19 2:22 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> > On 12/12/19 11:04 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >> There have been deadlock reports[1, 2] where put_page is called
> >> from softirq context and this causes trouble with the hugetlb_lock,
> >> as well as potentially the subpool lock.
> >>
> >> For such an unlikely scenario, lets not add irq dancing overhead
> >> to the lock+unlock operations, which could incur in expensive
> >> instruction dependencies, particularly when considering hard-irq
> >> safety. For example PUSHF+POPF on x86.
> >>
> >> Instead, just use a workqueue and do the free_huge_page() in regular
> >> task context.
> >>
> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191211194615.18502-1-longman@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180905112341.21355-1-aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Reported-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@xxxxxxx>
> > Thank you Davidlohr.
> >
> > The patch does seem fairly simple and straight forward.  I need to brush up
> > on my workqueue knowledge to provide a full review.
> >
> > Longman,
> > Do you have a test to reproduce the issue?  If so, can you try running with
> > this patch.
> 
> Yes, I do have a test that can reproduce the issue. I will run it with
> the patch and report the status tomorrow.

Can you extract guts of the testcase and integrate them into hugetlb
test suite?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs