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=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 A2C20C43461 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 08:39:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (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 10F37215A4 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 08:39:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="GTkXRiJ2" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 10F37215A4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-snps-arc-bounces+linux-snps-arc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=stG8anrsZOpyhfldYuXxYXl3Lk5RKxkB1lwz5wWcXZ8=; b=GTkXRiJ2lViR8VK0ltiZTkYwT tXq494EmDbKTXO7WFWGk84/JKgRcjDvp7G02oefBepAnpxlgjsvYmrHX2XGkTrGOP+7UD9vCfYEKC VpF4XaLbxHzEERVSMG5W1lO5ph3KUDw38i/BY7PwUulnSL5o5kk1i3kLY23PDk1yzp3a35xmxCGJR 3CrCWtuHW7/o+wM8Wdg3A/dVczykGh8jE7Us6OlmjHWKIqQBRe8MptMyW+crkAIbZS62b3a/gSxHV U8BGWGftGC8pu1XyjDcBVV0vxtuDXk7hmFfxRW73w9tMHlRArOPdfbuS7/ife3zFDbFp8WwJEttjL qGb+ZYVgg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kFvdf-0006oW-Ch; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 08:39:35 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kFvda-0006mV-Q2; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 08:39:31 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AAA11FB; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 01:39:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.163.71.250] (unknown [10.163.71.250]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F9E33F66E; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 01:39:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] mm/debug_vm_pgtable fixes To: Gerald Schaefer References: <20200902114222.181353-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20200904172647.002113d3@thinkpad> <20200904180115.07ee5f00@thinkpad> <20200904195346.6d57ff9f@thinkpad> From: Anshuman Khandual Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 14:08:55 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200904195346.6d57ff9f@thinkpad> Content-Language: en-US X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200909_043930_952456_F4D7E9CE X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 33.12 ) X-BeenThere: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on Synopsys ARC Processors List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , linux-mm@kvack.org, Vineet Gupta , mpe@ellerman.id.au, akpm@linux-foundation.org, "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv , Gerald Schaefer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-snps-arc" Errors-To: linux-snps-arc-bounces+linux-snps-arc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 09/04/2020 11:23 PM, Gerald Schaefer wrote: > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 18:01:15 +0200 > Gerald Schaefer wrote: > >> On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 17:26:47 +0200 >> Gerald Schaefer wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 12:18:05 +0530 >>> Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 09/02/2020 05:12 PM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >>>>> This patch series includes fixes for debug_vm_pgtable test code so that >>>>> they follow page table updates rules correctly. The first two patches introduce >>>>> changes w.r.t ppc64. The patches are included in this series for completeness. We can >>>>> merge them via ppc64 tree if required. >>>>> >>>>> Hugetlb test is disabled on ppc64 because that needs larger change to satisfy >>>>> page table update rules. >>>>> >>>>> These tests are broken w.r.t page table update rules and results in kernel >>>>> crash as below. >>>>> >>>>> [ 21.083519] kernel BUG at arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable.c:304! >>>>> cpu 0x0: Vector: 700 (Program Check) at [c000000c6d1e76c0] >>>>> pc: c00000000009a5ec: assert_pte_locked+0x14c/0x380 >>>>> lr: c0000000005eeeec: pte_update+0x11c/0x190 >>>>> sp: c000000c6d1e7950 >>>>> msr: 8000000002029033 >>>>> current = 0xc000000c6d172c80 >>>>> paca = 0xc000000003ba0000 irqmask: 0x03 irq_happened: 0x01 >>>>> pid = 1, comm = swapper/0 >>>>> kernel BUG at arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable.c:304! >>>>> [link register ] c0000000005eeeec pte_update+0x11c/0x190 >>>>> [c000000c6d1e7950] 0000000000000001 (unreliable) >>>>> [c000000c6d1e79b0] c0000000005eee14 pte_update+0x44/0x190 >>>>> [c000000c6d1e7a10] c000000001a2ca9c pte_advanced_tests+0x160/0x3d8 >>>>> [c000000c6d1e7ab0] c000000001a2d4fc debug_vm_pgtable+0x7e8/0x1338 >>>>> [c000000c6d1e7ba0] c0000000000116ec do_one_initcall+0xac/0x5f0 >>>>> [c000000c6d1e7c80] c0000000019e4fac kernel_init_freeable+0x4dc/0x5a4 >>>>> [c000000c6d1e7db0] c000000000012474 kernel_init+0x24/0x160 >>>>> [c000000c6d1e7e20] c00000000000cbd0 ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x6c >>>>> >>>>> With DEBUG_VM disabled >>>>> >>>>> [ 20.530152] BUG: Kernel NULL pointer dereference on read at 0x00000000 >>>>> [ 20.530183] Faulting instruction address: 0xc0000000000df330 >>>>> cpu 0x33: Vector: 380 (Data SLB Access) at [c000000c6d19f700] >>>>> pc: c0000000000df330: memset+0x68/0x104 >>>>> lr: c00000000009f6d8: hash__pmdp_huge_get_and_clear+0xe8/0x1b0 >>>>> sp: c000000c6d19f990 >>>>> msr: 8000000002009033 >>>>> dar: 0 >>>>> current = 0xc000000c6d177480 >>>>> paca = 0xc00000001ec4f400 irqmask: 0x03 irq_happened: 0x01 >>>>> pid = 1, comm = swapper/0 >>>>> [link register ] c00000000009f6d8 hash__pmdp_huge_get_and_clear+0xe8/0x1b0 >>>>> [c000000c6d19f990] c00000000009f748 hash__pmdp_huge_get_and_clear+0x158/0x1b0 (unreliable) >>>>> [c000000c6d19fa10] c0000000019ebf30 pmd_advanced_tests+0x1f0/0x378 >>>>> [c000000c6d19fab0] c0000000019ed088 debug_vm_pgtable+0x79c/0x1244 >>>>> [c000000c6d19fba0] c0000000000116ec do_one_initcall+0xac/0x5f0 >>>>> [c000000c6d19fc80] c0000000019a4fac kernel_init_freeable+0x4dc/0x5a4 >>>>> [c000000c6d19fdb0] c000000000012474 kernel_init+0x24/0x160 >>>>> [c000000c6d19fe20] c00000000000cbd0 ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x6c >>>>> >>>>> Changes from v3: >>>>> * Address review feedback >>>>> * Move page table depost and withdraw patch after adding pmdlock to avoid bisect failure. >>>> >>>> This version >>>> >>>> - Builds on x86, arm64, s390, arc, powerpc and riscv (defconfig with DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE) >>>> - Runs on arm64 and x86 without any regression, atleast nothing that I have noticed >>>> - Will be great if this could get tested on s390, arc, riscv, ppc32 platforms as well >>> >>> When I quickly tested v3, it worked fine, but now it turned out to >>> only work fine "sometimes", both v3 and v4. I need to look into it >>> further, but so far it seems related to the hugetlb_advanced_tests(). >>> >>> I guess there was already some discussion on this test, but we did >>> not receive all of the thread(s). Please always add at least >>> linux-s390@vger.kernel.org and maybe myself and Vasily Gorbik >>> for further discussions. >> >> BTW, with myself I mean the new address gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com. >> The old gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com seems to work (again), but is not >> very reliable. >> >> BTW2, a quick test with this change (so far) made the issues on s390 >> go away: >> >> @@ -1069,7 +1074,7 @@ static int __init debug_vm_pgtable(void) >> spin_unlock(ptl); >> >> #ifndef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64 >> - hugetlb_advanced_tests(mm, vma, ptep, pte_aligned, vaddr, prot); >> + hugetlb_advanced_tests(mm, vma, (pte_t *) pmdp, pmd_aligned, vaddr, prot); >> #endif >> >> spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock); >> >> That would more match the "pte_t pointer" usage for hugetlb code, >> i.e. just cast a pmd_t pointer to it. Also changed to pmd_aligned, >> but I think the root cause is the pte_t pointer. >> >> Not entirely sure though if that would really be the correct fix. >> I somehow lost whatever little track I had about what these tests >> really want to check, and if that would still be valid with that >> change. > > Another potential issue, apparently not for s390, but maybe for > others, is that the vaddr passed to hugetlb_advanced_tests() is > also not pmd/pud size aligned, like you did in pmd/pud_advanced_tests(). > > I guess for the hugetlb_advanced_tests() you need to choose if > you want to test pmd or pud hugepages, and accordingly prepare > the *ptep, pfn and vaddr input. If you only check for CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE, > then probably only pmd hugepages would be safe, there might be > architectures only supporting one hugepage size. I guess preparing for PMD based HugeTLB tests should be sufficient for now, which can be improved later on to cover other levels. > > So, for s390, at least the ptep input value is a problem. Still > need to better understand how it goes wrong, but it seems to be > fixed when using proper pmdp, and also works with pudp. > > For others, especially the apparent issues on ppc64, the other > non-hugepage aligned input pfn and vaddr might also be an issue, > e.g. power at least seems to use the vaddr in its set_huge_pte_at() > implementation for some pmd_off(mm, addr) calculation. > > Again, sorry if this was already discussed, I missed most of it > and honestly didn't properly look at the scarce mails that we did > receive... Sure, will consider these points and try improve tests afterwards. _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc