| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <8b9cb771-8fa1-4fc2-bb45-20673240edd8@csgroup.eu>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 10:50:18 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/debug_vm_pgtable: Ensure THP availability via
has_transparent_hugepage()
Le 18/05/2021 à 10:13, Anshuman Khandual a écrit :
> On certain platforms, THP support could not just be validated via the build
> option CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE. Instead has_transparent_hugepage() also
> needs to be called upon to verify THP runtime support. Otherwise the debug
> test might just run into unusable THP helpers like in the case of a 4K hash
s/might/will/
> config on powerpc platform [1]. This just moves all pfn_pmd() and pfn_pud()
> after THP runtime validation with has_transparent_hugepage() which prevents
> the mentioned problem.
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213069
>
> Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
> Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
There should be a Fixes: tag
> ---
> This applies on v5.13-rc2 after the following patches.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210419071820.750217-1-liushixin2@huawei.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210419071820.750217-2-liushixin2@huawei.com/
I can't see any fixes: tag in those patches, and their subject line even targets them to -next. Are
they meant to go to 5.13 and stable ?
If not, how do you coordinate between your patch that must go in 5.13 and in stable, and those two
patches ? Shouldn't your patch go first and those other patches be rebased on top ?
>
> mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c b/mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c
> index e2f35db8ba69..6ff92c8b0a00 100644
> --- a/mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c
> +++ b/mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c
> @@ -146,13 +146,14 @@ static void __init pte_savedwrite_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> static void __init pmd_basic_tests(unsigned long pfn, int idx)
> {
> pgprot_t prot = protection_map[idx];
> - pmd_t pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> unsigned long val = idx, *ptr = &val;
> + pmd_t pmd;
>
> if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> return;
>
> pr_debug("Validating PMD basic (%pGv)\n", ptr);
> + pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
>
> /*
> * This test needs to be executed after the given page table entry
> @@ -232,9 +233,14 @@ static void __init pmd_advanced_tests(struct mm_struct *mm,
>
> static void __init pmd_leaf_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pmd_t pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> + pmd_t pmd;
> +
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
>
> pr_debug("Validating PMD leaf\n");
> + pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> +
> /*
> * PMD based THP is a leaf entry.
> */
> @@ -244,12 +250,16 @@ static void __init pmd_leaf_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
>
> static void __init pmd_savedwrite_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pmd_t pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> + pmd_t pmd;
>
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING))
> return;
>
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
> +
> pr_debug("Validating PMD saved write\n");
> + pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> WARN_ON(!pmd_savedwrite(pmd_mk_savedwrite(pmd_clear_savedwrite(pmd))));
> WARN_ON(pmd_savedwrite(pmd_clear_savedwrite(pmd_mk_savedwrite(pmd))));
> }
> @@ -258,13 +268,14 @@ static void __init pmd_savedwrite_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> static void __init pud_basic_tests(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long pfn, int idx)
> {
> pgprot_t prot = protection_map[idx];
> - pud_t pud = pfn_pud(pfn, prot);
> unsigned long val = idx, *ptr = &val;
> + pud_t pud;
>
> if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> return;
>
> pr_debug("Validating PUD basic (%pGv)\n", ptr);
> + pud = pfn_pud(pfn, prot);
>
> /*
> * This test needs to be executed after the given page table entry
> @@ -348,9 +359,13 @@ static void __init pud_advanced_tests(struct mm_struct *mm,
>
> static void __init pud_leaf_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pud_t pud = pfn_pud(pfn, prot);
> + pud_t pud;
> +
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
>
> pr_debug("Validating PUD leaf\n");
> + pud = pfn_pud(pfn, prot);
> /*
> * PUD based THP is a leaf entry.
> */
> @@ -642,12 +657,16 @@ static void __init pte_protnone_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> static void __init pmd_protnone_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pmd_t pmd = pmd_mkhuge(pfn_pmd(pfn, prot));
> + pmd_t pmd;
>
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING))
> return;
>
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
> +
> pr_debug("Validating PMD protnone\n");
> + pmd = pmd_mkhuge(pfn_pmd(pfn, prot));
> WARN_ON(!pmd_protnone(pmd));
> WARN_ON(!pmd_present(pmd));
> }
> @@ -667,18 +686,26 @@ static void __init pte_devmap_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> static void __init pmd_devmap_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pmd_t pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> + pmd_t pmd;
> +
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
>
> pr_debug("Validating PMD devmap\n");
> + pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> WARN_ON(!pmd_devmap(pmd_mkdevmap(pmd)));
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_PUD
> static void __init pud_devmap_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pud_t pud = pfn_pud(pfn, prot);
> + pud_t pud;
> +
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
>
> pr_debug("Validating PUD devmap\n");
> + pud = pfn_pud(pfn, prot);
> WARN_ON(!pud_devmap(pud_mkdevmap(pud)));
> }
> #else /* !CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_PUD */
> @@ -721,25 +748,33 @@ static void __init pte_swap_soft_dirty_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> static void __init pmd_soft_dirty_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pmd_t pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> + pmd_t pmd;
>
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY))
> return;
>
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
> +
> pr_debug("Validating PMD soft dirty\n");
> + pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> WARN_ON(!pmd_soft_dirty(pmd_mksoft_dirty(pmd)));
> WARN_ON(pmd_soft_dirty(pmd_clear_soft_dirty(pmd)));
> }
>
> static void __init pmd_swap_soft_dirty_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - pmd_t pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> + pmd_t pmd;
>
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY) ||
> !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_THP_MIGRATION))
> return;
>
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
> +
> pr_debug("Validating PMD swap soft dirty\n");
> + pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> WARN_ON(!pmd_swp_soft_dirty(pmd_swp_mksoft_dirty(pmd)));
> WARN_ON(pmd_swp_soft_dirty(pmd_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pmd)));
> }
> @@ -768,6 +803,9 @@ static void __init pmd_swap_tests(unsigned long pfn, pgprot_t prot)
> swp_entry_t swp;
> pmd_t pmd;
>
> + if (!has_transparent_hugepage())
> + return;
> +
> pr_debug("Validating PMD swap\n");
> pmd = pfn_pmd(pfn, prot);
> swp = __pmd_to_swp_entry(pmd);
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists