Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm: rmap: Fix CONT-PTE/PMD size hugetlb issue when unmapping

Gerald Schaefer
2022-04-29T20:02:14Z

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 16:14:43 +0800
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:

> On some architectures (like ARM64), it can support CONT-PTE/PMD size
> hugetlb, which means it can support not only PMD/PUD size hugetlb:
> 2M and 1G, but also CONT-PTE/PMD size: 64K and 32M if a 4K page
> size specified.
>
> When unmapping a hugetlb page, we will get the relevant page table
> entry by huge_pte_offset() only once to nuke it. This is correct
> for PMD or PUD size hugetlb, since they always contain only one
> pmd entry or pud entry in the page table.
>
> However this is incorrect for CONT-PTE and CONT-PMD size hugetlb,
> since they can contain several continuous pte or pmd entry with
> same page table attributes, so we will nuke only one pte or pmd
> entry for this CONT-PTE/PMD size hugetlb page.
>
> And now we only use try_to_unmap() to unmap a poisoned hugetlb page,
> which means now we will unmap only one pte entry for a CONT-PTE or
> CONT-PMD size poisoned hugetlb page, and we can still access other
> subpages of a CONT-PTE or CONT-PMD size poisoned hugetlb page,
> which will cause serious issues possibly.
>
> So we should change to use huge_ptep_clear_flush() to nuke the
> hugetlb page table to fix this issue, which already considered
> CONT-PTE and CONT-PMD size hugetlb.
>
> Note we've already used set_huge_swap_pte_at() to set a poisoned
> swap entry for a poisoned hugetlb page.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> mm/rmap.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> index 7cf2408..1e168d7 100644
> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> @@ -1564,28 +1564,28 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> break;
> }
> }
> + pteval = huge_ptep_clear_flush(vma, address, pvmw.pte);

Unlike in your patch 2/3, I do not see that this (huge) pteval would later
be used again with set_huge_pte_at() instead of set_pte_at(). Not sure if
this (huge) pteval could end up at a set_pte_at() later, but if yes, then
this would be broken on s390, and you'd need to use set_huge_pte_at()
instead of set_pte_at() like in your patch 2/3.

Please note that huge_ptep_get functions do not return valid PTEs on s390,
and such PTEs must never be set directly with set_pte_at(), but only with
set_huge_pte_at().

Background is that, for hugetlb pages, we are of course not really dealing
with PTEs at this level, but rather PMDs or PUDs, depending on hugetlb size.
On s390, the layout is quite different for PTEs and PMDs / PUDs, and
unfortunately the hugetlb code is not properly reflecting this by using
PMD or PUD types, like the THP code does.

So, as work-around, on s390, the huge_ptep_xxx functions will return
only fake PTEs, which must be converted again to a proper PMD or PUD,
before writing them to the page table, which is what happens in
set_huge_pte_at(), but not in set_pte_at().