From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] powerpc/64s/hash: Fix 128TB-512TB virtual address boundary case allocation
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2017 16:08:06 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y3njsne9.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171106100315.29720-2-npiggin@gmail.com>
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> writes:
> When allocating VA space with a hint that crosses 128TB, the SLB addr_limit
> variable is not expanded if addr is not > 128TB, but the slice allocation
> looks at task_size, which is 512TB. This results in slice_check_fit()
> incorrectly succeeding because the slice_count truncates off bit 128 of the
> requested mask, so the comparison to the available mask succeeds.
But then the mask passed to slice_check_fit() is generated using
context.addr_limit as max value. So how did that return succcess? ie,
we get the request mask via
slice_range_to_mask(addr, len, &mask);
And the potential/possible mask using
slice_mask_for_size(mm, psize, &good_mask);
So how did slice_check_fit() return sucess with
slice_check_fit(mm, mask, good_mask);
>
> Fix this by using mm->context.addr_limit instead of mm->task_size for
> testing allocation limits. This causes such allocations to fail.
>
> Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Fixes: f4ea6dcb08 ("powerpc/mm: Enable mappings above 128TB")
> Reported-by: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c
> index 45f6740dd407..567db541c0a1 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c
> @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ static int slice_area_is_free(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> {
> struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>
> - if ((mm->task_size - len) < addr)
> + if ((mm->context.addr_limit - len) < addr)
I was looking at these as generic boundary check against task size and
for specific range check we should have created mask always using
context.addr_limit. That should keep the boundary condition check same
across radix/hash.
> return 0;
> vma = find_vma(mm, addr);
> return (!vma || (addr + len) <= vm_start_gap(vma));
> @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ static void slice_mask_for_free(struct mm_struct *mm, struct slice_mask *ret)
> if (!slice_low_has_vma(mm, i))
> ret->low_slices |= 1u << i;
>
> - if (mm->task_size <= SLICE_LOW_TOP)
> + if (mm->context.addr_limit <= SLICE_LOW_TOP)
> return;
>
> for (i = 0; i < GET_HIGH_SLICE_INDEX(mm->context.addr_limit); i++)
> @@ -446,19 +446,20 @@ unsigned long slice_get_unmapped_area(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
>
> /* Sanity checks */
> BUG_ON(mm->task_size == 0);
> + BUG_ON(mm->context.addr_limit == 0);
> VM_BUG_ON(radix_enabled());
>
> slice_dbg("slice_get_unmapped_area(mm=%p, psize=%d...\n", mm, psize);
> slice_dbg(" addr=%lx, len=%lx, flags=%lx, topdown=%d\n",
> addr, len, flags, topdown);
>
> - if (len > mm->task_size)
> + if (len > mm->context.addr_limit)
> return -ENOMEM;
> if (len & ((1ul << pshift) - 1))
> return -EINVAL;
> if (fixed && (addr & ((1ul << pshift) - 1)))
> return -EINVAL;
> - if (fixed && addr > (mm->task_size - len))
> + if (fixed && addr > (mm->context.addr_limit - len))
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> /* If hint, make sure it matches our alignment restrictions */
> @@ -466,7 +467,7 @@ unsigned long slice_get_unmapped_area(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
> addr = _ALIGN_UP(addr, 1ul << pshift);
> slice_dbg(" aligned addr=%lx\n", addr);
> /* Ignore hint if it's too large or overlaps a VMA */
> - if (addr > mm->task_size - len ||
> + if (addr > mm->context.addr_limit - len ||
> !slice_area_is_free(mm, addr, len))
> addr = 0;
> }
> --
> 2.15.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-06 10:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-06 10:03 [PATCH 0/5] VA allocator fixes Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 1/5] powerpc/64s/hash: Fix 128TB-512TB virtual address boundary case allocation Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:38 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2017-11-06 10:54 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 11:05 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 11:21 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07 2:00 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-07 2:03 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 2/5] powerpc/64s/hash: Allow MAP_FIXED allocations to cross 128TB boundary Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:44 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 11:55 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07 2:28 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-11-07 2:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 3/5] powerpc/64s/hash: Fix fork() with 512TB process address space Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:44 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 4/5] powerpc/64s/radix: Fix 128TB-512TB virtual address boundary case allocation Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 11:14 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 5/5] powerpc/64s: mm_context.addr_limit is only used on hash Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 15:16 ` [PATCH 0/5] VA allocator fixes Florian Weimer
2017-11-07 0:06 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07 1:59 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87y3njsne9.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).