[PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[albin_yang]

From: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>

During stress testing with stress-ng on a 256-CPU system, a softlockup
was observed when madvise(MADV_COLD) was called on a 31GB memory region
backed by transparent hugepages. The region contains 15935 THP PMD
entries, and the softlockup was triggered after 14485 of them had been
processed.

The THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range() has no scheduling
point. walk_pmd_range() invokes it once per 2MB PMD entry with no
cond_resched() anywhere in the loop. Each iteration calls
pmdp_invalidate() which issues a synchronous TLB shootdown (dsb ish)
waiting for all CPUs to acknowledge. This operation can be
time-consuming under heavy system load, causing the accumulated time
across all PMD entries to exceed the softlockup threshold (20s) and
panic when softlockup_panic=1. On a CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y kernel, there
is no other opportunity to reschedule during this entire traversal.

The regular PTE path already has an unconditional cond_resched() at the
function tail (introduced by commit 9c276cc65a58 ("mm: introduce
MADV_COLD") and commit 1a4e58cce84e ("mm: introduce MADV_PAGEOUT") when
MADV_COLD and MADV_PAGEOUT were first introduced) and a conditional one
inside the loop (commit b2f557a21bc8 ("mm/madvise: add cond_resched()
in madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()")). The THP branch never
received equivalent treatment.

Fix by adding cond_resched() at the huge_unlock exit path after
spin_unlock(ptl) and reclaim_pages(), which is the single exit point
for all goto paths in the THP branch.

Crash log:
  watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#63 stuck for 23s! [stress-ng-vm:1665914]
  ...
  Call trace:
  pmdp_invalidate+0x48/0x68
  madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range+0x84c/0xb00
  walk_pmd_range.isra.0+0x1ac/0x3b0
  walk_pud_range+0x120/0x190
  walk_pgd_range+0x170/0x1b8
  __walk_page_range+0x184/0x198
  walk_page_range_vma+0x94/0x128
  madvise_cold+0xd8/0x198
  madvise_vma_behavior+0x234/0x638
  madvise_walk_vmas.constprop.0+0xdc/0x210
  madvise_do_behavior+0xa8/0x328
  do_madvise+0xd8/0x140
  __arm64_sys_madvise+0x2c/0xe0

Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
---
 mm/madvise.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/mm/madvise.c b/mm/madvise.c
index eeee82cf2b3f..0755e6d99757 100644
--- a/mm/madvise.c
+++ b/mm/madvise.c
@@ -450,6 +450,7 @@ static int madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 		spin_unlock(ptl);
 		if (pageout)
 			reclaim_pages(&folio_list);
+		cond_resched();
 		return 0;
 	}
 
-- 
2.43.5

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[Gregory Price]

On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:40:42AM +0800, albin_yang@163.com wrote:
> From: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
> 
> Crash log:
>   watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#63 stuck for 23s! [stress-ng-vm:1665914]
>   ...
>   Call trace:
>   pmdp_invalidate+0x48/0x68
>   madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range+0x84c/0xb00
>   walk_pmd_range.isra.0+0x1ac/0x3b0
>   walk_pud_range+0x120/0x190
>   walk_pgd_range+0x170/0x1b8
>   __walk_page_range+0x184/0x198
>   walk_page_range_vma+0x94/0x128
>   madvise_cold+0xd8/0x198
>   madvise_vma_behavior+0x234/0x638
>   madvise_walk_vmas.constprop.0+0xdc/0x210
>   madvise_do_behavior+0xa8/0x328
>   do_madvise+0xd8/0x140
>   __arm64_sys_madvise+0x2c/0xe0
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
> ---
>  mm/madvise.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/madvise.c b/mm/madvise.c
> index eeee82cf2b3f..0755e6d99757 100644
> --- a/mm/madvise.c
> +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> @@ -450,6 +450,7 @@ static int madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
>  		spin_unlock(ptl);
>  		if (pageout)
>  			reclaim_pages(&folio_list);
> +		cond_resched();
>  		return 0;
>  	}
> 

This same improvement came naturally from refactoring the entire
function into a proper pagewalk structure:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260922235830.2350770-10-gourry@gourry.net/

this function is really nasty.

~Gregory

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[Andrew Morton]

On Sat, 10 Oct 2026 10:26:33 -0400 Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net> wrote:

> > Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/madvise.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/madvise.c b/mm/madvise.c
> > index eeee82cf2b3f..0755e6d99757 100644
> > --- a/mm/madvise.c
> > +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> > @@ -450,6 +450,7 @@ static int madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
> >  		spin_unlock(ptl);
> >  		if (pageout)
> >  			reclaim_pages(&folio_list);
> > +		cond_resched();
> >  		return 0;
> >  	}
> > 
> 
> This same improvement came naturally from refactoring the entire
> function into a proper pagewalk structure:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260922235830.2350770-10-gourry@gourry.net/

I'm thinking

Fixes: 9c276cc65a58 ("mm: introduce MADV_COLD")

Sep 25 2019.  So 5.x and 6.x kernels want this.  Current kernels
actually don't need this because PREEMPT_NONE has virtually
disappeared.  But 99%(?) of machines run 5.x and 6.x.

I'll go with Wei's simple one-liner for backportability & safety. 
Let's look at broader changes in future -rc cycles.

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[David Hildenbrand (Arm)]

On 10/10/26 04:40, albin_yang@163.com wrote:
> From: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
> 
> During stress testing with stress-ng on a 256-CPU system, a softlockup
> was observed when madvise(MADV_COLD) was called on a 31GB memory region
> backed by transparent hugepages. The region contains 15935 THP PMD
> entries, and the softlockup was triggered after 14485 of them had been
> processed.
> 
> The THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range() has no scheduling
> point. walk_pmd_range() invokes it once per 2MB PMD entry with no
> cond_resched() anywhere in the loop. Each iteration calls
> pmdp_invalidate() which issues a synchronous TLB shootdown (dsb ish)
> waiting for all CPUs to acknowledge. This operation can be
> time-consuming under heavy system load, causing the accumulated time
> across all PMD entries to exceed the softlockup threshold (20s) and
> panic when softlockup_panic=1. On a CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y kernel, there
> is no other opportunity to reschedule during this entire traversal.
> 
> The regular PTE path already has an unconditional cond_resched() at the
> function tail (introduced by commit 9c276cc65a58 ("mm: introduce
> MADV_COLD") and commit 1a4e58cce84e ("mm: introduce MADV_PAGEOUT") when
> MADV_COLD and MADV_PAGEOUT were first introduced) and a conditional one
> inside the loop (commit b2f557a21bc8 ("mm/madvise: add cond_resched()
> in madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()")). The THP branch never
> received equivalent treatment.

That's quite a text to say "Do it just like the PTE case" ;)

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org>

-- 
Cheers,

David

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 01:02:59PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 10/10/26 04:40, albin_yang@163.com wrote:
> > From: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
> >
> > During stress testing with stress-ng on a 256-CPU system, a softlockup
> > was observed when madvise(MADV_COLD) was called on a 31GB memory region
> > backed by transparent hugepages. The region contains 15935 THP PMD
> > entries, and the softlockup was triggered after 14485 of them had been
> > processed.
> >
> > The THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range() has no scheduling
> > point. walk_pmd_range() invokes it once per 2MB PMD entry with no
> > cond_resched() anywhere in the loop. Each iteration calls
> > pmdp_invalidate() which issues a synchronous TLB shootdown (dsb ish)
> > waiting for all CPUs to acknowledge. This operation can be
> > time-consuming under heavy system load, causing the accumulated time
> > across all PMD entries to exceed the softlockup threshold (20s) and
> > panic when softlockup_panic=1. On a CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y kernel, there
> > is no other opportunity to reschedule during this entire traversal.
> >
> > The regular PTE path already has an unconditional cond_resched() at the
> > function tail (introduced by commit 9c276cc65a58 ("mm: introduce
> > MADV_COLD") and commit 1a4e58cce84e ("mm: introduce MADV_PAGEOUT") when
> > MADV_COLD and MADV_PAGEOUT were first introduced) and a conditional one
> > inside the loop (commit b2f557a21bc8 ("mm/madvise: add cond_resched()
> > in madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()")). The THP branch never
> > received equivalent treatment.
>
> That's quite a text to say "Do it just like the PTE case" ;)

Yeah would it be possible to cut down these giant paragraphs please?

Maybe:

	Running stress-ng on a 256-CPU system resulted in softlockups when
	madvise(MADV_COLD) was called over a 31 GiB THP-populated memory
	region with CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE set.

	This is a result of a missing cond_resched() in the THP PMD path in
	madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range(), so fix the issue by doing the
	same thing the PTE path does by adding the missing cond_resched().

>
> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org>

The logic LGTM though, so:

Acked-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) <ljs@kernel.org>

--
Cheers, Lorenzo

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)]

On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:26:33AM -0400, Gregory Price wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:40:42AM +0800, albin_yang@163.com wrote:
> > From: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
> >
> > Crash log:
> >   watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#63 stuck for 23s! [stress-ng-vm:1665914]
> >   ...
> >   Call trace:
> >   pmdp_invalidate+0x48/0x68
> >   madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range+0x84c/0xb00
> >   walk_pmd_range.isra.0+0x1ac/0x3b0
> >   walk_pud_range+0x120/0x190
> >   walk_pgd_range+0x170/0x1b8
> >   __walk_page_range+0x184/0x198
> >   walk_page_range_vma+0x94/0x128
> >   madvise_cold+0xd8/0x198
> >   madvise_vma_behavior+0x234/0x638
> >   madvise_walk_vmas.constprop.0+0xdc/0x210
> >   madvise_do_behavior+0xa8/0x328
> >   do_madvise+0xd8/0x140
> >   __arm64_sys_madvise+0x2c/0xe0
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/madvise.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/madvise.c b/mm/madvise.c
> > index eeee82cf2b3f..0755e6d99757 100644
> > --- a/mm/madvise.c
> > +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> > @@ -450,6 +450,7 @@ static int madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
> >  		spin_unlock(ptl);
> >  		if (pageout)
> >  			reclaim_pages(&folio_list);
> > +		cond_resched();
> >  		return 0;
> >  	}
> >
>
> This same improvement came naturally from refactoring the entire
> function into a proper pagewalk structure:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260922235830.2350770-10-gourry@gourry.net/
>
> this function is really nasty.

Nice!

And thank you for looking at this horror show of a function.

But yeah as Andrew said, need something for the backport, then your work can
help eliminate the source of such things! :)

>
> ~Gregory

--
Cheers, Lorenzo

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[Gregory Price]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 01:58:18PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:26:33AM -0400, Gregory Price wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:40:42AM +0800, albin_yang@163.com wrote:
> >
> > This same improvement came naturally from refactoring the entire
> > function into a proper pagewalk structure:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260922235830.2350770-10-gourry@gourry.net/
> >
> > this function is really nasty.
> 
> Nice!
> 
> And thank you for looking at this horror show of a function.
> 
> But yeah as Andrew said, need something for the backport, then your work can
> help eliminate the source of such things! :)
> 

Oh yeah totally reasonable, just pointing out that two separate efforts
came to the same conclusion.

~Gregory

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[Gregory Price]

On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:40:42AM +0800, albin_yang@163.com wrote:
> 
> During stress testing with stress-ng on a 256-CPU system, a softlockup
> was observed when madvise(MADV_COLD) was called on a 31GB memory region
> backed by transparent hugepages. The region contains 15935 THP PMD
> entries, and the softlockup was triggered after 14485 of them had been
> processed.
> 
...
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <albinwyang@tencent.com>

Reviewed-by: Gregory Price (Meta) <gourry@gourry.net>

Re: [PATCH] mm/madvise: add cond_resched() in THP branch of madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range()

[Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 09:32:14AM -0400, Gregory Price wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 01:58:18PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:26:33AM -0400, Gregory Price wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 10:40:42AM +0800, albin_yang@163.com wrote:
> > >
> > > This same improvement came naturally from refactoring the entire
> > > function into a proper pagewalk structure:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260922235830.2350770-10-gourry@gourry.net/
> > >
> > > this function is really nasty.
> >
> > Nice!
> >
> > And thank you for looking at this horror show of a function.
> >
> > But yeah as Andrew said, need something for the backport, then your work can
> > help eliminate the source of such things! :)
> >
>
> Oh yeah totally reasonable, just pointing out that two separate efforts
> came to the same conclusion.

Yeah, it's nice it fell out that way!

>
> ~Gregory

--
Cheers, Lorenzo