Re: [PATCH v2] mm/pagewalk.c: walk_page_range should avoid VM_PFNMAP areas

Cliff Wickman
2013-05-02T17:16:47Z

On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 12:44:04PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 07:10:48AM -0500, Cliff Wickman wrote:
> >
> > /proc/<pid>/smaps and similar walks through a user page table should not
> > be looking at VM_PFNMAP areas.
> >
> > This is v2:
> > - moves the VM_BUG_ON out of the loop
> > - adds the needed test for vma->vm_start <= addr
> >
> > Certain tests in walk_page_range() (specifically split_huge_page_pmd())
> > assume that all the mapped PFN's are backed with page structures. And this is
> > not usually true for VM_PFNMAP areas. This can result in panics on kernel
> > page faults when attempting to address those page structures.
> >
> > There are a half dozen callers of walk_page_range() that walk through
> > a task's entire page table (as N. Horiguchi pointed out). So rather than
> > change all of them, this patch changes just walk_page_range() to ignore
> > VM_PFNMAP areas.
> >
> > The logic of hugetlb_vma() is moved back into walk_page_range(), as we
> > want to test any vma in the range.
> >
> > VM_PFNMAP areas are used by:
> > - graphics memory manager gpu/drm/drm_gem.c
> > - global reference unit sgi-gru/grufile.c
> > - sgi special memory char/mspec.c
> > - and probably several out-of-tree modules
> >
> > I'm copying everyone who has changed this file recently, in case
> > there is some reason that I am not aware of to provide
> > /proc/<pid>/smaps|clear_refs|maps|numa_maps for these VM_PFNMAP areas.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Cliff Wickman <cpw@sgi.com>
>
> walk_page_range() does vma-based walk only for address ranges backed by
> hugetlbfs, and it doesn't see vma for address ranges backed by normal pages
> and thps (in those case we just walk over page table hierarchy).

Agreed, walk_page_range() only checks for a hugetlbfs-type vma as it
scans an address range.

The problem I'm seeing comes in when it calls walk_pud_range() for any address
range that is not within a hugetlbfs vma:
walk_pmd_range()
split_huge_page_pmd_mm()
split_huge_page_pmd()
__split_huge_page_pmd()
page = pmd_page(*pmd)
And such a page structure does not exist for a VM_PFNMAP area.

> I think that vma-based walk was introduced as a kind of dirty hack to
> handle hugetlbfs, and it can be cleaned up in the future. So I'm afraid
> it's not a good idea to extend or adding code heavily depending on this hack.

walk_page_range() looks like generic infrastructure to scan any range
of a user's address space - as in /proc/<pid>/smaps and similar. And the
hugetlbfs check seems to have been added as an exception.
Huge page exceptional cases occur further down the chain. And
when a corresponding page structure is needed for those cases we
run into the problem.

I'm not depending on walk_page_range(). I'm just trying to survive the
case where it is scanning a VM_PFNMAP range.

> I recommend that you check VM_PFNMAP in the possible callers' side.
> But this patch seems to solve your problem, so with properly commenting
> this somewhere, I do not oppose it.

Agreed, it could be handled by checking at several points higher up. But
checking at this common point seems more straightforward to me.

-Cliff
>
> Thanks,
> Naoya Horiguchi

--
Cliff Wickman
SGI
cpw@sgi.com
(651) 683-3824