From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Zeng Heng <zengheng@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: yezhenyu2@huawei.com, zhurui3@huawei.com, will@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
zengheng4@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unsharing PMD tables
Date: Fri, 22 May 2026 11:13:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ahAsPU00ZTTJV3Ye@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b7098272-a348-d918-774a-d5d2645fc7f4@huaweicloud.com>
On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 01:32:07PM +0800, Zeng Heng wrote:
> On 2026/5/21 23:15, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 04:05:07PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 03:30:11PM +0800, Zeng Heng wrote:
> > > > From: Zeng Heng <zengheng4@huawei.com>
> > > >
> > > > When huge_pmd_unshare() is called to unshare a PMD table, the
> > > > tlb_unshare_pmd_ptdesc() function sets tlb->unshared_tables=true
> > > > but the aarch64 tlb_flush() only checked tlb->freed_tables to
> > > > determine whether to use TLBF_NONE (vae1is, invalidates walk
> > > > cache) or TLBF_NOWALKCACHE (vale1is, leaf-only).
> > > >
> > > > This caused the stale PMD page table entry to remain in the walk cache
> > > > after unshare, potentially leading to incorrect page table walks.
> > > >
> > > > Fix by including unshared_tables in the check, so that when
> > > > unsharing tables, TLBF_NONE is used and the walk cache is properly
> > > > invalidated.
> > > >
> > > > Here is the detailed distinction between vae1is and vale1is:
> > > >
> > > > | Instruction Combination | Actual Invalidation Scope |
> > > > | ------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------|
> > > > | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`0` | All entries at all levels (full invalidation) |
> > > > | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Non-leaf at Level 0/1 + leaf at Level 2 |
> > > > | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`0` | Leaf entries at all levels (non-leaf not cleared) |
> > > > | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Leaf entry at Level 2 only |
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zeng Heng <zengheng4@huawei.com>
> > > The fix looks fine but does it need:
> > >
> > > Fixes: 8ce720d5bd91 ("mm/hugetlb: fix excessive IPI broadcasts when unsharing PMD tables using mmu_gather")
> > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h | 3 ++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> > > > index 10869d7731b8..751bd57bc3ba 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> > > > @@ -53,7 +53,8 @@ static inline int tlb_get_level(struct mmu_gather *tlb)
> > > > static inline void tlb_flush(struct mmu_gather *tlb)
> > > > {
> > > > struct vm_area_struct vma = TLB_FLUSH_VMA(tlb->mm, 0);
> > > > - tlbf_t flags = tlb->freed_tables ? TLBF_NONE : TLBF_NOWALKCACHE;
> > > > + tlbf_t flags = (tlb->freed_tables || tlb->unshared_tables) ?
> > > > + TLBF_NONE : TLBF_NOWALKCACHE;
> > > > unsigned long stride = tlb_get_unmap_size(tlb);
> > > > int tlb_level = tlb_get_level(tlb);
> > Do we need this as well?
>
> The proposed fix has been validated against the issue scenarios and
> works as expected.
>
> Per the ARM Architecture Reference Manual, whether only the last-level
> page table entry is invalidated is determined by the instruction used
> (vale1is for leaf entry only, vae1is for walk cache including leaf entry and
> non-leaf entry), rather than the TTL field. The TTL field merely specifies
> which level the leaf entry belongs to.
Ah, yes, you are right. The TTL is still 2 in this case for a huge pmd,
we just want the walk cache leading to it to be invalidated. So no need
for the additional tlb_get_level().
Thanks.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-22 10:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-21 7:30 [PATCH] arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unsharing PMD tables Zeng Heng
2026-05-21 15:05 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-05-21 15:15 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-05-22 5:32 ` Zeng Heng
2026-05-22 10:13 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2026-05-22 10:38 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-05-22 4:43 ` Zeng Heng
2026-05-22 10:42 ` Catalin Marinas
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=ahAsPU00ZTTJV3Ye@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yezhenyu2@huawei.com \
--cc=zengheng4@huawei.com \
--cc=zengheng@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=zhurui3@huawei.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