[LTP] [RFC PATCH] mm: correct status code which move_pages() returns for zero page

[Zi Yan]

On 17 Apr 2018, at 15:00, Michal Hocko wrote:

> On Tue 17-04-18 22:28:33, Li Wang wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 10:14 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue 17-04-18 15:03:00, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Tue 17-04-18 19:06:15, Li Wang wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
>>>>> index f65dd69..2b315fc 100644
>>>>> --- a/mm/migrate.c
>>>>> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
>>>>> @@ -1608,7 +1608,7 @@ static int do_pages_move(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>> nodemask_t task_nodes,
>>>>>                     continue;
>>>>>
>>>>>             err = store_status(status, i, err, 1);
>>>>> -           if (err)
>>>>> +           if (!err)
>>>>>                     goto out_flush;
>>>>
>>>> This change just doesn't make any sense to me. Why should we bail out if
>>>> the store_status is successul? I am trying to wrap my head around the
>>>> test case. 6b9d757ecafc ("mm, numa: rework do_pages_move") tried to
>>>> explain that move_pages has some semantic issues and the new
>>>> implementation might be not 100% replacement. Anyway I am studying the
>>>> test case to come up with a proper fix.
>>>
>>> OK, I get what the test cases does. I've failed to see the subtle
>>> difference between alloc_pages_on_node and numa_alloc_onnode. The later
>>> doesn't faul in anything.
>>>
>>> Why are we getting EPERM is quite not yet clear to me.
>>> add_page_for_migration uses FOLL_DUMP which should return EFAULT on
>>> zero pages (no_page_table()).
>>>
>>>         err = PTR_ERR(page);
>>>         if (IS_ERR(page))
>>>                 goto out;
>>>
>>> therefore bails out from add_page_for_migration and store_status should
>>> store that value. There shouldn't be any EPERM on the way.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I print the the return value and confirmed the
>> add_page_for_migration()​
>> do right things for zero page. and after store_status(...) the status saves
>> -EFAULT.
>> So I did the change above.
>
> OK, I guess I knnow what is going on. I must be overwriting the status
> on the way out by
>
> out_flush:
> 	/* Make sure we do not overwrite the existing error */
> 	err1 = do_move_pages_to_node(mm, &pagelist, current_node);
> 	if (!err1)
> 		err1 = store_status(status, start, current_node, i - start);
>
> This error handling is rather fragile and I was quite unhappy about it
> at the time I was developing it. I have to remember all the details why
> I've done it that way but I would bet my hat this is it. More on this
> tomorrow.

Hi Michal and Li,

The problem is that the variable start is not set properly after store_status(),
like the "start = i;" after the first store_status().

The following patch should fix the problem (it has passed all move_pages test cases from ltp
on my machine):

diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
index f65dd69e1fd1..32afa4723e7f 100644
--- a/mm/migrate.c
+++ b/mm/migrate.c
@@ -1619,6 +1619,8 @@ static int do_pages_move(struct mm_struct *mm, nodemask_t task_nodes,
                        if (err)
                                goto out;
                }
+               /* Move to next page (i+1), after we have saved page status (until i) */
+               start = i + 1;
                current_node = NUMA_NO_NODE;
        }
 out_flush:

Feel free to check it by yourselves.

--
Best Regards
Yan Zi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/attachments/20180417/ea924d1a/attachment-0001.sig>