From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl0-x244.google.com (mail-pl0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40JvkD5cDMzDr5X for ; Sun, 8 Apr 2018 23:42:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pl0-x244.google.com with SMTP id c7-v6so270620plr.5 for ; Sun, 08 Apr 2018 06:42:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 23:41:50 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin To: Balbir Singh Cc: "open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE (KVM) FOR POWERPC" , "open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" , Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: trace_tlbie must not be called in realmode Message-ID: <20180408234150.36d766f6@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20180405175631.31381-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <20180405175631.31381-2-npiggin@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 8 Apr 2018 20:17:47 +1000 Balbir Singh wrote: > On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 3:56 AM, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > This crashes with a "Bad real address for load" attempting to load > > from the vmalloc region in realmode (faulting address is in DAR). > > > > Oops: Bad interrupt in KVM entry/exit code, sig: 6 [#1] > > LE SMP NR_CPUS=2048 NUMA PowerNV > > CPU: 53 PID: 6582 Comm: qemu-system-ppc Not tainted 4.16.0-01530-g43d1859f0994 > > NIP: c0000000000155ac LR: c0000000000c2430 CTR: c000000000015580 > > REGS: c000000fff76dd80 TRAP: 0200 Not tainted (4.16.0-01530-g43d1859f0994) > > MSR: 9000000000201003 CR: 48082222 XER: 00000000 > > CFAR: 0000000102900ef0 DAR: d00017fffd941a28 DSISR: 00000040 SOFTE: 3 > > NIP [c0000000000155ac] perf_trace_tlbie+0x2c/0x1a0 > > LR [c0000000000c2430] do_tlbies+0x230/0x2f0 > > > > I suspect the reason is the per-cpu data is not in the linear chunk. > > This could be restored if that was able to be fixed, but for now, > > just remove the tracepoints. > > Could you share the stack trace as well? I've not observed this in my testing. I can't seem to find it, I can try reproduce tomorrow. It was coming from h_remove hcall from the guest. It's 176 logical CPUs. > May be I don't have as many cpus. I presume your talking about the per cpu > data offsets for per cpu trace data? It looked like it was dereferencing virtually mapped per-cpu data, yes. Probably the perf_events deref. Thanks, Nick