Re: 6.10/bisected/regression - commit 8430557fc584 cause warning at mm/page_table_check.c:198 __page_table_check_ptes_set+0x306

David Hildenbrand
2024-05-22T07:49:00Z

On 22.05.24 00:36, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 03:21:04AM +0500, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote:
>> On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 2:37 AM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Hmm I still cannot reproduce. Weird.
>>>
>>> Would it be possible for you to identify which line in debug_vm_pgtable.c
>>> triggered that issue?
>>>
>>> I think it should be some set_pte_at() but I'm not sure, as there aren't a
>>> lot and all of them look benign so far. It could be that I missed
>>> something important.
>>
>> I hope it's helps:
>
> Thanks for offering this, it's just that it doesn't look coherent with what
> was reported for some reason.
>
>>
>>> sh /usr/src/kernels/(uname -r)/scripts/faddr2line /lib/debug/lib/modules/(uname -r)/vmlinux debug_vm_pgtable+0x1c04
>> debug_vm_pgtable+0x1c04/0x3360:
>> native_ptep_get_and_clear at arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64.h:94
>> (inlined by) ptep_get_and_clear at arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h:1262
>> (inlined by) ptep_clear at include/linux/pgtable.h:509
>
> This is a pte_clear(), and pte_clear() shouldn't even do the set() checks,
> and shouldn't stumble over what I added.
>
> IOW, it doesn't match with the real stack dump previously:
>
> [ 5.581003] ? __page_table_check_ptes_set+0x306/0x3c0
> [ 5.581274] ? __pfx___page_table_check_ptes_set+0x10/0x10
> [ 5.581544] ? __pfx_check_pgprot+0x10/0x10
> [ 5.581806] set_ptes.constprop.0+0x66/0xd0
> [ 5.582072] ? __pfx_set_ptes.constprop.0+0x10/0x10
> [ 5.582333] ? __pfx_pte_val+0x10/0x10
> [ 5.582595] debug_vm_pgtable+0x1c04/0x3360
>

Staring at pte_clear_tests():

#ifndef CONFIG_RISCV
pte = __pte(pte_val(pte) | RANDOM_ORVALUE);
#endif
set_pte_at(args->mm, args->vaddr, args->ptep, pte);

So we set random PTE bits, probably setting the present, uffd and write
bit at the same time. That doesn't make too much sense when we want to
perform that such combinations cannot exist.

In pmd_clear_tests() and friends we use WRITE_ONCE() instead, so there
we don't run into trouble.

--
Cheers,

David / dhildenb