Re: [PATCH 1/1] page cache: fix page_cache_next/prev_miss off by one

[Ackerley Tng]

Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 71dc90f64e43..123540c7ba45 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -1733,7 +1733,9 @@ bool __folio_lock_or_retry(struct folio *folio,  
> struct mm_struct *mm,
>    *
>    * Return: The index of the gap if found, otherwise an index outside the
>    * range specified (in which case 'return - index >= max_scan' will be  
> true).
> - * In the rare case of index wrap-around, 0 will be returned.
> + * In the rare case of index wrap-around, 0 will be returned.  0 will  
> also
> + * be returned if index == 0 and there is a gap at the index.  We can not
> + * wrap-around if passed index == 0.
>    */
>   pgoff_t page_cache_next_miss(struct address_space *mapping,
>   			     pgoff_t index, unsigned long max_scan)
> @@ -1743,12 +1745,13 @@ pgoff_t page_cache_next_miss(struct address_space  
> *mapping,
>   	while (max_scan--) {
>   		void *entry = xas_next(&xas);
>   		if (!entry || xa_is_value(entry))
> -			break;
> -		if (xas.xa_index == 0)
> -			break;
> +			return xas.xa_index;
> +		if (xas.xa_index == 0 && index != 0)
> +			return xas.xa_index;
>   	}

> -	return xas.xa_index;
> +	/* No gaps in range and no wrap-around, return index beyond range */
> +	return xas.xa_index + 1;
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_cache_next_miss);


This doesn't seem to work as expected:

Here's a test I did

/* Modified so I can pass in an xarray for this test */
static unsigned long page_cache_next_miss(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long  
index,
					  unsigned long max_scan)
{
	XA_STATE(xas, xa, index);

	while (max_scan--) {
		void *entry = xas_next(&xas);
		if (!entry || xa_is_value(entry))
			return xas.xa_index;
		if (xas.xa_index == 0 && index != 0)
			return xas.xa_index;
	}

	return xas.xa_index + 1;
}

static noinline void check_find_5(void)
{
	struct xarray xa;
	unsigned long max_scan;
	void *ptr = malloc(10);

	xa_init(&xa);
	xa_store_range(&xa, 3, 5, ptr, GFP_KERNEL);

	max_scan = 3;
	printk("page_cache_next_miss(xa, %d, %ld): %ld\n", 4, max_scan,
	       page_cache_next_miss(&xa, 4, max_scan));

}

The above gave me: page_cache_next_miss(xa, 4, 3): 7

But I was expecting a return value of 6.

I investigated a little, and it seems like entry at index 6 if we start
iterating before 6 is 0xe, and xa_is_internal(entry) returns true.

Not yet familiar with the internals of xarrays, not sure what the fix
should be.