[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4a76fbda-aa9d-867b-e2eb-a1951780aeec@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:00:14 +0100
From: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/5] mm: ptdump: Provide page size to notepage()
On 19/04/2021 14:14, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 16/04/2021 à 12:51, Steven Price a écrit :
>> On 16/04/2021 11:38, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 16/04/2021 à 11:28, Steven Price a écrit :
>>>> On 15/04/2021 18:18, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To be honest I don't fully understand why powerpc requires the
>>>> page_size - it appears to be using it purely to find "holes" in the
>>>> calls to note_page(), but I haven't worked out why such holes would
>>>> occur.
>>>
>>> I was indeed introduced for KASAN. We have a first commit
>>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/cabe8138 which uses page
>>> size to detect whether it is a KASAN like stuff.
>>>
>>> Then came https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b00ff6d8c as a
>>> fix. I can't remember what the problem was exactly, something around
>>> the use of hugepages for kernel memory, came as part of the series
>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/cover/cover.1589866984.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu/
>>
>>
>>
>> Ah, that's useful context. So it looks like powerpc took a different
>> route to reducing the KASAN output to x86.
>>
>> Given the generic ptdump code has handling for KASAN already it should
>> be possible to drop that from the powerpc arch code, which I think
>> means we don't actually need to provide page size to notepage().
>> Hopefully that means more code to delete ;)
>>
>
> Looking at how the generic ptdump code handles KASAN, I'm a bit sceptic.
>
> IIUC, it is checking that kasan_early_shadow_pte is in the same page as
> the pgtable referred by the PMD entry. But what happens if that PMD
> entry is referring another pgtable which is inside the same page as
> kasan_early_shadow_pte ?
>
> Shouldn't the test be
>
> if (pmd_page_vaddr(val) == lm_alias(kasan_early_shadow_pte))
> return note_kasan_page_table(walk, addr);
Now I come to look at this code again, I think you're right. On arm64
this doesn't cause a problem - page tables are page sized and page
aligned, so there couldn't be any non-KASAN pgtables sharing the page.
Obviously that's not necessarily true of other architectures.
Feel free to add a patch to your series ;)
Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists