The patch titled Subject: mm/thp: fix deferred split unqueue naming and locking has been added to the -mm mm-hotfixes-unstable branch. Its filename is mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking.patch

This patch will shortly appear at https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/25-new.git/tree/patches...

This patch will later appear in the mm-hotfixes-unstable branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm

Before you just go and hit "reply", please: a) Consider who else should be cc'ed b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's

*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***

The -mm tree is included into linux-next via the mm-everything branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm and is updated there every 2-3 working days

------------------------------------------------------ From: Hugh Dickins hughd@google.com Subject: mm/thp: fix deferred split unqueue naming and locking Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 13:02:13 -0700 (PDT)

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 87eaceb3faa5 ("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 dafff3f4c850 ("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 87eaceb3faa5 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 fac0516b5534 ("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: 87eaceb3faa5 ("mm: thp: make deferred split shrinker memcg aware") Fixes: dafff3f4c850 ("mm: split underused THPs") Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins hughd@google.com Acked-by: David Hildenbrand david@redhat.com Reviewed-by: Yang 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: Andrew Morton akpm@linux-foundation.org ---

mm/huge_memory.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- mm/internal.h | 10 +++++----- mm/memcontrol-v1.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ mm/memcontrol.c | 8 +++++--- mm/migrate.c | 4 ++-- mm/page_alloc.c | 1 - mm/swap.c | 4 ++-- mm/vmscan.c | 4 ++-- 8 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

--- a/mm/huge_memory.c~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/huge_memory.c @@ -3588,10 +3588,27 @@ int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *fo return split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(&folio->page, list, ret); }

-void __folio_undo_large_rmappable(struct folio *folio) +/* + * __folio_unqueue_deferred_split() is not to be called directly: + * the folio_unqueue_deferred_split() inline wrapper in mm/internal.h + * limits its calls to those folios which may have a _deferred_list for + * queueing THP splits, and that list is (racily observed to be) non-empty. + * + * It is unsafe to call folio_unqueue_deferred_split() until folio refcount is + * zero: because even when split_queue_lock is held, a non-empty _deferred_list + * might be in use on deferred_split_scan()'s unlocked on-stack list. + * + * If memory cgroups are enabled, split_queue_lock is in the mem_cgroup: it is + * therefore important to unqueue deferred split before changing folio memcg. + */ +bool __folio_unqueue_deferred_split(struct folio *folio) { struct deferred_split *ds_queue; unsigned long flags; + bool unqueued = false; + + WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_ref_count(folio)); + WARN_ON_ONCE(!mem_cgroup_disabled() && !folio_memcg(folio));

ds_queue = get_deferred_split_queue(folio); spin_lock_irqsave(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags); @@ -3603,8 +3620,11 @@ void __folio_undo_large_rmappable(struct MTHP_STAT_NR_ANON_PARTIALLY_MAPPED, -1); } list_del_init(&folio->_deferred_list); + unqueued = true; } spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags); + + return unqueued; /* useful for debug warnings */ }

/* partially_mapped=false won't clear PG_partially_mapped folio flag */ @@ -3627,14 +3647,11 @@ void deferred_split_folio(struct folio * return;

/* - * The try_to_unmap() in page reclaim path might reach here too, - * this may cause a race condition to corrupt deferred split queue. - * And, if page reclaim is already handling the same folio, it is - * unnecessary to handle it again in shrinker. - * - * Check the swapcache flag to determine if the folio is being - * handled by page reclaim since THP swap would add the folio into - * swap cache before calling try_to_unmap(). + * Exclude swapcache: originally to avoid a corrupt deferred split + * queue. Nowadays that is fully prevented by mem_cgroup_swapout(); + * but if page reclaim is already handling the same folio, it is + * unnecessary to handle it again in the shrinker, so excluding + * swapcache here may still be a useful optimization. */ if (folio_test_swapcache(folio)) return; --- a/mm/internal.h~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/internal.h @@ -684,11 +684,11 @@ static inline void folio_set_order(struc #endif }

-void __folio_undo_large_rmappable(struct folio *folio); -static inline void folio_undo_large_rmappable(struct folio *folio) +bool __folio_unqueue_deferred_split(struct folio *folio); +static inline bool folio_unqueue_deferred_split(struct folio *folio) { if (folio_order(folio) <= 1 || !folio_test_large_rmappable(folio)) - return; + return false;

/* * At this point, there is no one trying to add the folio to @@ -696,9 +696,9 @@ static inline void folio_undo_large_rmap * to check without acquiring the split_queue_lock. */ if (data_race(list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list))) - return; + return false;

- __folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); + return __folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio); }

static inline struct folio *page_rmappable_folio(struct page *page) --- a/mm/memcontrol.c~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/memcontrol.c @@ -4629,9 +4629,6 @@ static void uncharge_folio(struct folio struct obj_cgroup *objcg;

VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_lru(folio), folio); - VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_order(folio) > 1 && - !folio_test_hugetlb(folio) && - !list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list), folio);

/* * Nobody should be changing or seriously looking at @@ -4678,6 +4675,7 @@ static void uncharge_folio(struct folio ug->nr_memory += nr_pages; ug->pgpgout++;

+ WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio)); folio->memcg_data = 0; }

@@ -4789,6 +4787,9 @@ void mem_cgroup_migrate(struct folio *ol

/* Transfer the charge and the css ref */ commit_charge(new, memcg); + + /* Warning should never happen, so don't worry about refcount non-0 */ + WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_unqueue_deferred_split(old)); old->memcg_data = 0; }

@@ -4975,6 +4976,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_swapout(struct folio *fo VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(oldid, folio); mod_memcg_state(swap_memcg, MEMCG_SWAP, nr_entries);

+ folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio); folio->memcg_data = 0;

if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg)) --- a/mm/memcontrol-v1.c~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/memcontrol-v1.c @@ -848,6 +848,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struc css_get(&to->css); css_put(&from->css);

+ /* Warning should never happen, so don't worry about refcount non-0 */ + WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio)); folio->memcg_data = (unsigned long)to;

__folio_memcg_unlock(from); @@ -1217,7 +1219,9 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_ra enum mc_target_type target_type; union mc_target target; struct folio *folio; + bool tried_split_before = false;

+retry_pmd: ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma); if (ptl) { if (mc.precharge < HPAGE_PMD_NR) { @@ -1227,6 +1231,27 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_ra target_type = get_mctgt_type_thp(vma, addr, *pmd, &target); if (target_type == MC_TARGET_PAGE) { folio = target.folio; + /* + * Deferred split queue locking depends on memcg, + * and unqueue is unsafe unless folio refcount is 0: + * split or skip if on the queue? first try to split. + */ + if (!list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list)) { + spin_unlock(ptl); + if (!tried_split_before) + split_folio(folio); + folio_unlock(folio); + folio_put(folio); + if (tried_split_before) + return 0; + tried_split_before = true; + goto retry_pmd; + } + /* + * So long as that pmd lock is held, the folio cannot + * be racily added to the _deferred_list, because + * __folio_remove_rmap() will find !partially_mapped. + */ if (folio_isolate_lru(folio)) { if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, true, mc.from, mc.to)) { --- a/mm/migrate.c~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/migrate.c @@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ static int __folio_migrate_mapping(struc folio_test_large_rmappable(folio)) { if (!folio_ref_freeze(folio, expected_count)) return -EAGAIN; - folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); + folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio); folio_ref_unfreeze(folio, expected_count); }

@@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ static int __folio_migrate_mapping(struc }

/* Take off deferred split queue while frozen and memcg set */ - folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); + folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio);

/* * Now we know that no one else is looking at the folio: --- a/mm/page_alloc.c~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -2686,7 +2686,6 @@ void free_unref_folios(struct folio_batc unsigned long pfn = folio_pfn(folio); unsigned int order = folio_order(folio);

- folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); if (!free_pages_prepare(&folio->page, order)) continue; /* --- a/mm/swap.c~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/swap.c @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ void __folio_put(struct folio *folio) }

page_cache_release(folio); - folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); + folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio); mem_cgroup_uncharge(folio); free_unref_page(&folio->page, folio_order(folio)); } @@ -988,7 +988,7 @@ void folios_put_refs(struct folio_batch free_huge_folio(folio); continue; } - folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); + folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio); __page_cache_release(folio, &lruvec, &flags);

if (j != i) --- a/mm/vmscan.c~mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking +++ a/mm/vmscan.c @@ -1476,7 +1476,7 @@ free_it: */ nr_reclaimed += nr_pages;

- folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); + folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio); if (folio_batch_add(&free_folios, folio) == 0) { mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(&free_folios); try_to_unmap_flush(); @@ -1864,7 +1864,7 @@ static unsigned int move_folios_to_lru(s if (unlikely(folio_put_testzero(folio))) { __folio_clear_lru_flags(folio);

- folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); + folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio); if (folio_batch_add(&free_folios, folio) == 0) { spin_unlock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock); mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(&free_folios); _

Patches currently in -mm which might be from hughd@google.com are

mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-queue-not-partially_mapped.patch mm-thp-fix-deferred-split-unqueue-naming-and-locking.patch mm-delete-the-unused-put_pages_list.patch