From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85AFEC33CB2 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 01:29:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F07206F0 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 01:29:52 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 31F07206F0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 87EE16B02C3; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 20:29:51 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 8305D6B02C4; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 20:29:51 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 71E0E6B02C5; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 20:29:51 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0221.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.221]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4AB6B02C3 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 20:29:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin29.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDB682499B9 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 01:29:50 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76432568940.29.cub06_72f54dd810551 X-HE-Tag: cub06_72f54dd810551 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6707 Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by imf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 01:29:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Jan 2020 17:29:47 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,380,1574150400"; d="scan'208";a="262007116" Received: from richard.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.159.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2020 17:29:45 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 09:30:00 +0800 From: Wei Yang To: Russell King - ARM Linux admin Cc: Wei Yang , Dmitry Osipenko , akpm@linux-foundation.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, kirill@shutemov.name, yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com, thellstrom@vmware.com, Thierry Reding , Jon Hunter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm/mremap: use pmd_addr_end to calculate next in move_page_tables() Message-ID: <20200130013000.GA5137@richard> Reply-To: Wei Yang References: <20200117232254.2792-1-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <20200117232254.2792-4-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <7147774a-14e9-4ff3-1548-4565f0d214d5@gmail.com> <20200129094738.GE25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20200129215745.GA20736@richard> <20200129232441.GI25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200129232441.GI25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:24:41PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin = wrote: >On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 05:57:45AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 09:47:38AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux adm= in wrote: >> >On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 05:47:57PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> >> 18.01.2020 02:22, Wei Yang =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: >> >> > Use the general helper instead of do it by hand. >> >> >=20 >> >> > Signed-off-by: Wei Yang >> >> > --- >> >> > mm/mremap.c | 7 ++----- >> >> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> >=20 >> >> > diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c >> >> > index c2af8ba4ba43..a258914f3ee1 100644 >> >> > --- a/mm/mremap.c >> >> > +++ b/mm/mremap.c >> >> > @@ -253,11 +253,8 @@ unsigned long move_page_tables(struct vm_are= a_struct *vma, >> >> > =20 >> >> > for (; old_addr < old_end; old_addr +=3D extent, new_addr +=3D = extent) { >> >> > cond_resched(); >> >> > - next =3D (old_addr + PMD_SIZE) & PMD_MASK; >> >> > - /* even if next overflowed, extent below will be ok */ >> >> > + next =3D pmd_addr_end(old_addr, old_end); >> >> > extent =3D next - old_addr; >> >> > - if (extent > old_end - old_addr) >> >> > - extent =3D old_end - old_addr; >> >> > old_pmd =3D get_old_pmd(vma->vm_mm, old_addr); >> >> > if (!old_pmd) >> >> > continue; >> >> > @@ -301,7 +298,7 @@ unsigned long move_page_tables(struct vm_area= _struct *vma, >> >> > =20 >> >> > if (pte_alloc(new_vma->vm_mm, new_pmd)) >> >> > break; >> >> > - next =3D (new_addr + PMD_SIZE) & PMD_MASK; >> >> > + next =3D pmd_addr_end(new_addr, new_addr + len); >> >> > if (extent > next - new_addr) >> >> > extent =3D next - new_addr; >> >> > move_ptes(vma, old_pmd, old_addr, old_addr + extent, new_vma, >> >> >=20 >> >>=20 >> >> Hello Wei, >> >>=20 >> >> Starting with next-20200122, I'm seeing the following in KMSG on NV= IDIA >> >> Tegra (ARM32): >> >>=20 >> >> BUG: Bad rss-counter state mm:(ptrval) type:MM_ANONPAGES val:190 >> >>=20 >> >> and eventually kernel hangs. >> >>=20 >> >> Git's bisection points to this patch and reverting it helps. Please= fix, >> >> thanks in advance. >> > >> >The above is definitely wrong - pXX_addr_end() are designed to be use= d >> >with an address index within the pXX table table and the address inde= x >> >of either the last entry in the same pXX table or the beginning of th= e >> >_next_ pXX table. Arbitary end address indicies are not allowed. >> > >>=20 >> #define pmd_addr_end(addr, end) \ >> ({ unsigned long __boundary =3D ((addr) + PMD_SIZE) & PMD_MASK; \ >> (__boundary - 1 < (end) - 1)? __boundary: (end); \ >> }) >>=20 >> If my understanding is correct, the definition here align the addr to = next PMD >> boundary or end. >>=20 >> I don't see the possibility to across another PMD. Do I miss something= ? > >Look at the definition of p*_addr_end() that are used when page tables >are rolled up. > Sorry, I don't get your point. What's the meaning of "roll up" here? Would you mind giving me an example? I see pmd_addr_end() is not used in = many places in core kernel. By glancing those usages, all the places use it li= ke pmd_addr_end(addr, end). Seems no specially handing on the end address. Or you mean the case when pmd_addr_end() is defined to return "end" direc= tly?=20 >> >When page tables are "rolled up" when levels don't exist, it is commo= n >> >practice for these macros to just return their end address index. >> >Hence, if they are used with arbitary end address indicies, then the >> >iteration will fail. >> > >> >The only way to do this is: >> > >> > next =3D pmd_addr_end(old_addr, >> > pud_addr_end(old_addr, >> > p4d_addr_end(old_addr, >> > pgd_addr_end(old_addr, old_end)))); >> > >> >which gives pmd_addr_end() (and each of the intermediate pXX_addr_end= ()) >> >the correct end argument. However, that's a more complex and verbose= , >> >and likely less efficient than the current code. >> > >> >I'd suggest that there's nothing to "fix" in the v5.5 code wrt this, >> >and trying to "clean it up" will just result in less efficient or >> >broken code. >> > >> >--=20 >> >RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ >> >FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 62= 2kbps up >> >According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up >>=20 >> --=20 >> Wei Yang >> Help you, Help me >>=20 > >--=20 >RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ >FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kb= ps up >According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up --=20 Wei Yang Help you, Help me