On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:55:47AM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Hi, Andrew,
> 
> This update patch is to fix the preemption warning raised by Michal
> Hocko.  raw_cpu_ptr() is used to replace this_cpu_ptr() and comments are
> added for why it is used.
> 

Andrew & Michal,

Here's a fix that's a follow on patch instead of an updated patch
as Michal has suggested.  I've updated the comments a bit to make it
clearer.

Thanks.

Tim

--->8---
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:57:00 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] mm/swap: Use raw_cpu_ptr over this_cpu_ptr for swap slots
 access
To: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ying Huang <ying.hu...@intel.com>, dave.han...@intel.com, 
a...@linux.intel.com, aaron...@intel.com, linux...@kvack.org, 
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins <hu...@google.com>, Shaohua Li 
<s...@kernel.org>, Minchan Kim <minc...@kernel.org>, Rik van Riel 
<r...@redhat.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarca...@redhat.com>, Kirill A . Shutemov 
<kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com>, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov....@gmail.com>, 
Johannes Weiner <han...@cmpxchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org>, Hillf 
Danton <hillf...@alibaba-inc.com>, Christian Borntraeger 
<borntrae...@de.ibm.com>, Jonathan Corbet <cor...@lwn.net>

From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.hu...@intel.com>

The usage of this_cpu_ptr in get_swap_page causes a bug warning
as it is used in pre-emptible code.

[   57.812314] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: 
kswapd0/527
[   57.814360] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x19
[   57.815237] CPU: 1 PID: 527 Comm: kswapd0 Tainted: G        W 
4.9.0-mmotm-00135-g4e9a9895ebef #1042
[   57.816019] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 
1.10.1-1 04/01/2014
[   57.816019]  ffffc900001939c0 ffffffff81329c60 0000000000000001 
ffffffff81a0ce06
[   57.816019]  ffffc900001939f0 ffffffff81343c2a 00000000000137a0 
ffffea0000dfd2a0
[   57.816019]  ffff88003c49a700 ffffc90000193b10 ffffc90000193a00 
ffffffff81343c53
[   57.816019] Call Trace:
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff81329c60>] dump_stack+0x68/0x92
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff81343c2a>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xe0
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff81343c53>] debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x19
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff8115f06f>] get_swap_page+0x19/0x183
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff8114e01d>] shmem_writepage+0xce/0x38c
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff81148916>] shrink_page_list+0x81f/0xdbf
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff81149652>] shrink_inactive_list+0x2ab/0x594
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff8114a22f>] shrink_node_memcg+0x4c7/0x673
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff8114a49f>] shrink_node+0xc4/0x282
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff8114a49f>] ? shrink_node+0xc4/0x282
[   57.816019]  [<ffffffff8114b8cb>] kswapd+0x656/0x834

Logic wise, We do allow pre-emption as per cpu ptr cache->slots is
protected by the mutex cache->alloc_lock.  We switch the
inappropriately used this_cpu_ptr to raw_cpu_ptr for per cpu ptr
access of cache->slots.

Reported-by: Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.hu...@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.c...@linux.intel.com>
---
 mm/swap_slots.c | 11 ++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/swap_slots.c b/mm/swap_slots.c
index 8cf941e..9b5bc86 100644
--- a/mm/swap_slots.c
+++ b/mm/swap_slots.c
@@ -303,7 +303,16 @@ swp_entry_t get_swap_page(void)
        swp_entry_t entry, *pentry;
        struct swap_slots_cache *cache;
 
-       cache = this_cpu_ptr(&swp_slots);
+       /*
+        * Preemption is allowed here, because we may sleep
+        * in refill_swap_slots_cache().  But it is safe, because
+        * accesses to the per-CPU data structure are protected by the
+        * mutex cache->alloc_lock.
+        *
+        * The alloc path here does not touch cache->slots_ret
+        * so cache->free_lock is not taken.
+        */
+       cache = raw_cpu_ptr(&swp_slots);
 
        entry.val = 0;
        if (check_cache_active()) {
-- 
2.5.5

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to