From: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" <vbabka@kernel.org>
To: Karl Mehltretter <kmehltretter@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@fb.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Brendan Jackman <brendan.jackman@linux.dev>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: skip shuffling and reporting for no-lock frees
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 12:02:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5e7b114-2bda-49e3-974f-170211501203@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261005063515.6312-1-kmehltretter@gmail.com>
On 10/5/26 08:35, Karl Mehltretter wrote:
> free_pages_nolock() may run in NMI context or while a raw spinlock is
> held. When its zone trylock succeeds, __free_one_page() still reaches
> optional work written for ordinary frees.
>
> shuffle_pick_tail() can refill its random-bit cache through
> get_random_u64(), which takes a per-CPU local lock.
> page_reporting_notify_free() can queue delayed work. Both operations can
> enter locking outside the trylock-or-defer mechanism used by no-lock
> frees.
For page_reporting_notify_free() are any raw spinlocks bad or is it the
scheduler locks?
> An instrumented PREEMPT_RT lockdep run forced a random-bit cache refill
> while calling free_pages_nolock() under a raw spinlock. The unpatched
> allocator reported:
>
> BUG: Invalid wait context
>
> The attempted lock was batched_entropy_u64.lock in get_random_u64().
> Lockdep showed the raw test lock and zone->lock both held.
In slab we solved this by using prandom - commit a1e244a9f177 ("mm/slab: use
prandom if !allow_spin")
Could be better?
> Skip allocator shuffling and page-reporting notification for FPI_NOLOCK.
> The freed page remains on the buddy list and can be collected by a later
> reporting pass.
>
> Trees from v6.15 through v7.2 call this flag FPI_TRYLOCK. Use
> FPI_TRYLOCK in place of FPI_NOLOCK when backporting this change.
>
> Fixes: 8c57b687e833 ("mm, bpf: Introduce free_pages_nolock()")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # see patch description, needs adjustments for <= 7.2
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Signed-off-by: Karl Mehltretter <kmehltretter@gmail.com>
> ---
> This was found while auditing the no-lock paths discussed at:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260919171443.90512-1-kmehltretter@gmail.com
>
> Tested on base e767a4ea70a3 in four-vCPU x86-64 QEMU TCG with
> PREEMPT_RT, PROVE_LOCKING, PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING,
> SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR, PAGE_REPORTING and page_alloc.shuffle=1.
>
> A temporary initcall registered page reporting and freed 65 maximum-order
> allocations with free_pages_nolock() under a raw spinlock. This exhausts
> shuffle_pick_tail()'s cache and forces a refill.
>
> unpatched patched
> free_pages_nolock() calls 65 65
> __free_one_page() calls 130 130
> shuffle_pick_tail() calls 65 0
> page_reporting_notify_free() calls 130 0
> reporting work pending 1 0
> invalid-wait-context reports 1 0
>
> Maximum-order splitting accounts for the 130 __free_one_page() calls.
> Both guests powered off. The patched guest emitted no diagnostics. This
> forced test does not measure normal frequency.
>
> A second A/B used no test-only MM caller. A BPF arena program attached to
> mm_page_free_batched requested 2,048 pages from a memcg-limited map. Partial
> failures rolled allocated pages back through free_pages_nolock() while the
> tracepoint held the per-CPU page-list lock. A virtio-balloon device provided
> page reporting.
>
> unpatched patched
> arena allocation attempts 70 70
> arena allocation failures 70 70
> shuffle calls from rollback 9 0
> get_random_u64() calls from shuffle 1 0
> reporting notifications 12 0
> delayed-work queues 5 0
>
> Both guests powered off without a diagnostic. This confirms that an in-tree
> caller reaches the optional operations. It did not reproduce a deadlock or
> lockdep warning.
>
> The upstream form applies to v7.3-rc1, mainline and next-20261002. The
> FPI_TRYLOCK backport applies to v6.15 through v7.2. mm/page_alloc.o builds
> on v6.18 and v7.2.7. Stable backports were not runtime tested.
>
> mm/page_alloc.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 12fac9084c48..3e21dc90b858 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -89,7 +89,10 @@ typedef int __bitwise fpi_t;
> */
> #define FPI_TO_TAIL ((__force fpi_t)BIT(1))
>
> -/* Free the page without taking locks. Rely on trylock only. */
> +/*
> + * Request the no-lock free path. Use trylocks and skip optional operations
> + * which can take other locks or queue work.
> + */
> #define FPI_NOLOCK ((__force fpi_t)BIT(2))
>
> /* free_pages_prepare() has already been called for page(s) being freed. */
> @@ -1013,7 +1016,7 @@ static inline void __free_one_page(struct page *page,
>
> if (fpi_flags & FPI_TO_TAIL)
> to_tail = true;
> - else if (is_shuffle_order(order))
> + else if (!(fpi_flags & FPI_NOLOCK) && is_shuffle_order(order))
is_shuffle_order() should be checked first as it has
CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR=n compole-time false variant, and static key.
> to_tail = shuffle_pick_tail();
> else
> to_tail = buddy_merge_likely(pfn, buddy_pfn, page, order);
> @@ -1021,7 +1024,7 @@ static inline void __free_one_page(struct page *page,
> __add_to_free_list(page, zone, order, migratetype, to_tail);
>
> /* Notify page reporting subsystem of freed page */
> - if (!(fpi_flags & FPI_SKIP_REPORT_NOTIFY))
> + if (!(fpi_flags & (FPI_SKIP_REPORT_NOTIFY | FPI_NOLOCK)))
Maybe add a comment why we check FPI_NOLOCK too?
> page_reporting_notify_free(order);
> }
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-20 10:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-05 6:35 Karl Mehltretter
2026-10-20 10:02 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f5e7b114-2bda-49e3-974f-170211501203@kernel.org \
--to=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexanderduyck@fb.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=brendan.jackman@linux.dev \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kmehltretter@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®