GitLab

Patch series "mm, hwpoison: enable 1GB hugepage support", v7.


This patch (of 8):

I found a weird state of 1GB hugepage pool, caused by the following
procedure:

  - run a process reserving all free 1GB hugepages,
  - shrink free 1GB hugepage pool to zero (i.e. writing 0 to
    /sys/kernel/mm/hugepages/hugepages-1048576kB/nr_hugepages), then
  - kill the reserving process.

, then all the hugepages are free *and* surplus at the same time.

  $ cat /sys/kernel/mm/hugepages/hugepages-1048576kB/nr_hugepages
  3
  $ cat /sys/kernel/mm/hugepages/hugepages-1048576kB/free_hugepages
  3
  $ cat /sys/kernel/mm/hugepages/hugepages-1048576kB/resv_hugepages
  0
  $ cat /sys/kernel/mm/hugepages/hugepages-1048576kB/surplus_hugepages
  3

This state is resolved by reserving and allocating the pages then freeing
them again, so this seems not to result in serious problem.  But it's a
little surprising (shrinking pool suddenly fails).

This behavior is caused by hstate_is_gigantic() check in
return_unused_surplus_pages().  This was introduced so long ago in 2008 by
commit aa888a74 ("hugetlb: support larger than MAX_ORDER"), and at
that time the gigantic pages were not supposed to be allocated/freed at
run-time.  Now kernel can support runtime allocation/free, so let's check
gigantic_page_runtime_supported() together.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220714042420.1847125-1-naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220714042420.1847125-2-naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev

Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>
Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Liu Shixin <liushixin2@huawei.com>
Cc: Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>