From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ynjKZ1qYvzDrq7 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 03:19:45 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:19:34 +0100 From: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: =?utf-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWU=?= Glisse , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Andrea Arcangeli , Joerg Roedel , Dan Williams , Sudeep Dutt , Ashutosh Dixit , Dimitri Sivanich , Jack Steiner , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: BSOD with [PATCH 00/13] mmu_notifier kill invalidate_page callback Message-ID: <20171130161933.GB1606@flask> References: <20170829235447.10050-1-jglisse@redhat.com> <20171130093320.66cxaoj45g2ttzoh@nora.maurer-it.com> <39823aee-4918-f87c-8342-89eff622ee43@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <39823aee-4918-f87c-8342-89eff622ee43@redhat.com> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 2017-11-30 12:20+0100, Paolo Bonzini: > On 30/11/2017 10:33, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > > > > It was reverted in 785373b4c38719f4af6775845df6be1dfaea120f after which > > the symptoms disappeared until this series was merged, which contains > > > > 369ea8242c0fb5239b4ddf0dc568f694bd244de4 mm/rmap: update to new mmu_notifier semantic v2 > > > > We haven't bisected the individual commits of the series yet, but the > > commit immediately preceding its merge exhibits no problems, while > > everything after does. It is not known whether the bug is actually in > > the series itself, or whether increasing the likelihood of triggering it > > is just a side-effect. There is a similar report[2] concerning an > > upgrade from 4.12.12 to 4.12.13, which does not contain this series in > > any form AFAICT but might be worth another look as well. > > I know of one issue in this series (invalidate_page was removed from KVM > without reimplementing it as invalidate_range). I'll try to prioritize > the fix, but I don't think I can do it before Monday. The series also dropped the reloading of the APIC access page and we never had it in invalidate_range_start ... I'll look into it today.