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=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 19FB1C388F7 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 07:36:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D44B2080A for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 07:36:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="THn9WZF7" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6D44B2080A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 998C0166AD3CA; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 23:36:17 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=63.128.21.124; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com; envelope-from=yi.zhang@redhat.com; receiver= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B10ED165C071C for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 23:36:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1604993773; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1Fa1Qejkwu3iK7eb7mcwSsrs5GdZp4JxcinaBxm/Q54=; b=THn9WZF7YKG2mYJrJ6ir4gsrYz6N02YdONO7uYqGTuIQkBkXbOWJU+Ef+Ax4ipp+bV9ocT jWfWoikkanw6QqsxG2O4bVWxXF0JnAwp4COa4fRI1uEfl+PET8pkMvomj4It/l6y5oL/qq zhlFcf5N2ZWckHAh5FzQ5GtlDomAL2E= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-334-18QyPLPTNbqb0_bukc_aNA-1; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 02:36:09 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 18QyPLPTNbqb0_bukc_aNA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 961611017DC8; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 07:36:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-12-67.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.67]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B5B85C1D0; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 07:36:06 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: regression from 5.10.0-rc3: BUG: Bad page state in process kworker/41:0 pfn:891066 during fio on devdax To: Jason Gunthorpe , Dan Williams References: <1687234809.1086398.1604889506963.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <4ed7ea52-20be-68fe-f920-238ba358395c@redhat.com> <20201109141216.GD244516@ziepe.ca> <20201109175442.GE244516@ziepe.ca> <20201110003616.GA525483@nvidia.com> From: Yi Zhang Message-ID: <27b0fccb-7f71-ca99-129d-bd3e373c2a85@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 15:36:04 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201110003616.GA525483@nvidia.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=yi.zhang@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Message-ID-Hash: F4UWU3HG7HHW2MZAT5QD3QR22XLQRHEV X-Message-ID-Hash: F4UWU3HG7HHW2MZAT5QD3QR22XLQRHEV X-MailFrom: yi.zhang@redhat.com X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation CC: linux-nvdimm X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/10/20 8:36 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 01:54:42PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 09:26:19AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 6:12 AM Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>> Wow, this is surprising >>>> >>>> This has been widely backported already, Dan please check?? >>>> >>>> I thought pgprot_decrypted was a NOP on most x86 platforms - >>>> sme_me_mask == 0: >>>> >>>> #define __sme_set(x) ((x) | sme_me_mask) >>>> #define __sme_clr(x) ((x) & ~sme_me_mask) >>>> >>>> ?? >>>> >>>> Confused how this can be causing DAX issues >>> Does that correctly preserve the "soft" pte bits? Especially >>> PTE_DEVMAP that DAX uses? >>> >>> I'll check... >> extern u64 sme_me_mask; >> #define __pgprot(x) ((pgprot_t) { (x) } ) >> #define pgprot_val(x) ((x).pgprot) >> #define __sme_clr(x) ((x) & ~sme_me_mask) >> #define pgprot_decrypted(prot) __pgprot(__sme_clr(pgprot_val(prot))) >> >> static inline int io_remap_pfn_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, >> unsigned long addr, unsigned long pfn, >> unsigned long size, pgprot_t prot) >> { >> return remap_pfn_range(vma, addr, pfn, size, pgprot_decrypted(prot)); >> } >> >> Not seeing how that could change the pgprot in any harmful way? >> >> Yi, are you using a platform where sme_me_mask != 0 ? >> >> That code looks clearly like it would only trigger on AMD SME systems, >> is that what you are using? > Can't be, the system is too old: > > [ 398.455914] Hardware name: HP ProLiant DL380 Gen9/ProLiant DL380 Gen9, BIOS P89 10/05/2016 > > I'm at a total loss how this change could even do anything on a > non-AMD system, let alone how this intersects in any way with DEVDAX, > which I could not find being used with io_remap_pfn_range() I will double confirm it. > How confident are you in the bisection? > > Jason > _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org