user/sven/linux.git/include/linux/mempolicy.h, branch v3.12.41

hugetlb: restrict hugepage_migration_support() to x86_64

2014-07-02T10:06:08Z

commit c177c81e09e517bbf75b67762cdab1b83aba6976 upstream. Currently hugepage migration is available for all archs which support pmd-level hugepage, but testing is done only for x86_64 and there're bugs for other archs. So to avoid breaking such archs, this patch limits the availability strictly to x86_64 until developers of other archs get interested in enabling this feature. Simply disabling hugepage migration on non-x86_64 archs is not enough to fix the reported problem where sys_move_pages() hits the BUG_ON() in follow_page(FOLL_GET), so let's fix this by checking if hugepage migration is supported in vma_migratable(). Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi Reported-by: Michael Ellerman Tested-by: Michael Ellerman Acked-by: Hugh Dickins Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Tony Luck Cc: Russell King Cc: Martin Schwidefsky Cc: James Hogan Cc: Ralf Baechle Cc: David Miller Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby

mm: migrate: remove VM_HUGETLB from vma flag check in vma_migratable()

2013-09-11T22:57:48Z

Enable hugepage migration from migrate_pages(2), move_pages(2), and mbind(2). Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi Acked-by: Hillf Danton Acked-by: Andi Kleen Reviewed-by: Wanpeng Li Cc: Mel Gorman Cc: Hugh Dickins Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Michal Hocko Cc: Rik van Riel Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

mm: mempolicy: turn vma_set_policy() into vma_dup_policy()

2013-09-11T22:57:00Z

Simple cleanup. Every user of vma_set_policy() does the same work, this looks a bit annoying imho. And the new trivial helper which does mpol_dup() + vma_set_policy() to simplify the callers. Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Mel Gorman Cc: Rik van Riel Cc: Andi Kleen Cc: David Rientjes Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

mm: mempolicy: Convert shared_policy mutex to spinlock

2013-01-03T01:32:13Z

Sasha was fuzzing with trinity and reported the following problem: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/mutex.c:269 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 6361, name: trinity-main 2 locks held by trinity-main/6361: #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [] __do_page_fault+0x1e4/0x4f0 #1: (&(&mm->page_table_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [] handle_pte_fault+0x3f7/0x6a0 Pid: 6361, comm: trinity-main Tainted: G W 3.7.0-rc2-next-20121024-sasha-00001-gd95ef01-dirty #74 Call Trace: __might_sleep+0x1c3/0x1e0 mutex_lock_nested+0x29/0x50 mpol_shared_policy_lookup+0x2e/0x90 shmem_get_policy+0x2e/0x30 get_vma_policy+0x5a/0xa0 mpol_misplaced+0x41/0x1d0 handle_pte_fault+0x465/0x6a0 This was triggered by a different version of automatic NUMA balancing but in theory the current version is vunerable to the same problem. do_numa_page -> numa_migrate_prep -> mpol_misplaced -> get_vma_policy -> shmem_get_policy It's very unlikely this will happen as shared pages are not marked pte_numa -- see the page_mapcount() check in change_pte_range() -- but it is possible. To address this, this patch restores sp->lock as originally implemented by Kosaki Motohiro. In the path where get_vma_policy() is called, it should not be calling sp_alloc() so it is not necessary to treat the PTL specially. Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro Tested-by: KOSAKI Motohiro Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

mempolicy: remove arg from mpol_parse_str, mpol_to_str

2013-01-02T17:27:10Z

Remove the unused argument (formerly no_context) from mpol_parse_str() and from mpol_to_str(). Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

Merge tag 'balancenuma-v11' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mel/linux-balancenuma

2012-12-16T23:18:08Z

Pull Automatic NUMA Balancing bare-bones from Mel Gorman: "There are three implementations for NUMA balancing, this tree (balancenuma), numacore which has been developed in tip/master and autonuma which is in aa.git. In almost all respects balancenuma is the dumbest of the three because its main impact is on the VM side with no attempt to be smart about scheduling. In the interest of getting the ball rolling, it would be desirable to see this much merged for 3.8 with the view to building scheduler smarts on top and adapting the VM where required for 3.9. The most recent set of comparisons available from different people are mel: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/9/108 mingo: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/7/331 tglx: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/10/437 srikar: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/10/397 The results are a mixed bag. In my own tests, balancenuma does reasonably well. It's dumb as rocks and does not regress against mainline. On the other hand, Ingo's tests shows that balancenuma is incapable of converging for this workloads driven by perf which is bad but is potentially explained by the lack of scheduler smarts. Thomas' results show balancenuma improves on mainline but falls far short of numacore or autonuma. Srikar's results indicate we all suffer on a large machine with imbalanced node sizes. My own testing showed that recent numacore results have improved dramatically, particularly in the last week but not universally. We've butted heads heavily on system CPU usage and high levels of migration even when it shows that overall performance is better. There are also cases where it regresses. Of interest is that for specjbb in some configurations it will regress for lower numbers of warehouses and show gains for higher numbers which is not reported by the tool by default and sometimes missed in treports. Recently I reported for numacore that the JVM was crashing with NullPointerExceptions but currently it's unclear what the source of this problem is. Initially I thought it was in how numacore batch handles PTEs but I'm no longer think this is the case. It's possible numacore is just able to trigger it due to higher rates of migration. These reports were quite late in the cycle so I/we would like to start with this tree as it contains much of the code we can agree on and has not changed significantly over the last 2-3 weeks." * tag 'balancenuma-v11' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mel/linux-balancenuma: (50 commits) mm/rmap, migration: Make rmap_walk_anon() and try_to_unmap_anon() more scalable mm/rmap: Convert the struct anon_vma::mutex to an rwsem mm: migrate: Account a transhuge page properly when rate limiting mm: numa: Account for failed allocations and isolations as migration failures mm: numa: Add THP migration for the NUMA working set scanning fault case build fix mm: numa: Add THP migration for the NUMA working set scanning fault case. mm: sched: numa: Delay PTE scanning until a task is scheduled on a new node mm: sched: numa: Control enabling and disabling of NUMA balancing if !SCHED_DEBUG mm: sched: numa: Control enabling and disabling of NUMA balancing mm: sched: Adapt the scanning rate if a NUMA hinting fault does not migrate mm: numa: Use a two-stage filter to restrict pages being migrated for unlikely task<->node relationships mm: numa: migrate: Set last_nid on newly allocated page mm: numa: split_huge_page: Transfer last_nid on tail page mm: numa: Introduce last_nid to the page frame sched: numa: Slowly increase the scanning period as NUMA faults are handled mm: numa: Rate limit setting of pte_numa if node is saturated mm: numa: Rate limit the amount of memory that is migrated between nodes mm: numa: Structures for Migrate On Fault per NUMA migration rate limiting mm: numa: Migrate pages handled during a pmd_numa hinting fault mm: numa: Migrate on reference policy ...

mm: mempolicy: Check for misplaced page

2012-12-11T14:42:41Z

This patch provides a new function to test whether a page resides on a node that is appropriate for the mempolicy for the vma and address where the page is supposed to be mapped. This involves looking up the node where the page belongs. So, the function returns that node so that it may be used to allocated the page without consulting the policy again. A subsequent patch will call this function from the fault path. Because of this, I don't want to go ahead and allocate the page, e.g., via alloc_page_vma() only to have to free it if it has the correct policy. So, I just mimic the alloc_page_vma() node computation logic--sort of. Note: we could use this function to implement a MPOL_MF_STRICT behavior when migrating pages to match mbind() mempolicy--e.g., to ensure that pages in an interleaved range are reinterleaved rather than left where they are when they reside on any page in the interleave nodemask. Signed-off-by: Lee Schermerhorn Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Linus Torvalds [ Added MPOL_F_LAZY to trigger migrate-on-fault; simplified code now that we don't have to bother with special crap for interleaved ] Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman

tmpfs: fix shared mempolicy leak

2012-12-06T19:56:43Z

This fixes a regression in 3.7-rc, which has since gone into stable. Commit 00442ad04a5e ("mempolicy: fix a memory corruption by refcount imbalance in alloc_pages_vma()") changed get_vma_policy() to raise the refcount on a shmem shared mempolicy; whereas shmem_alloc_page() went on expecting alloc_page_vma() to drop the refcount it had acquired. This deserves a rework: but for now fix the leak in shmem_alloc_page(). Hugh: shmem_swapin() did not need a fix, but surely it's clearer to use the same refcounting there as in shmem_alloc_page(), delete its onstack mempolicy, and the strange mpol_cond_copy() and __mpol_cond_copy() - those were invented to let swapin_readahead() make an unknown number of calls to alloc_pages_vma() with one mempolicy; but since 00442ad04a5e, alloc_pages_vma() has kept refcount in balance, so now no problem. Reported-and-tested-by: Tommi Rantala Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

UAPI: (Scripted) Disintegrate include/linux

2012-10-13T09:46:48Z

Signed-off-by: David Howells Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner Acked-by: Michael Kerrisk Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney Acked-by: Dave Jones

mempolicy: fix a race in shared_policy_replace()

2012-10-09T07:22:22Z

shared_policy_replace() use of sp_alloc() is unsafe. 1) sp_node cannot be dereferenced if sp->lock is not held and 2) another thread can modify sp_node between spin_unlock for allocating a new sp node and next spin_lock. The bug was introduced before 2.6.12-rc2. Kosaki's original patch for this problem was to allocate an sp node and policy within shared_policy_replace and initialise it when the lock is reacquired. I was not keen on this approach because it partially duplicates sp_alloc(). As the paths were sp->lock is taken are not that performance critical this patch converts sp->lock to sp->mutex so it can sleep when calling sp_alloc(). [kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com: Original patch] Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter Cc: Josh Boyer Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds