[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <344a4da-3890-45fd-607e-b5f85ca6ad48@google.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 22:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>,
Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
John David Anglin <dave.anglin@...l.net>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/23] mips: update_mmu_cache() can replace
__update_tlb()
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2023, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> >
> > I just bisected a crash while powering down a MIPS machine in QEMU to
> > this change as commit 8044511d3893 ("mips: update_mmu_cache() can
> > replace __update_tlb()") in linux-next.
>
> Thank you, Nathan, that's very helpful indeed. This patch certainly knew
> that it wanted testing, and I'm glad to hear that it is now seeing some.
>
> While powering down? The messages below look like it was just coming up,
> but no doubt that's because you were bisecting (or because I'm unfamiliar
> with what messages to expect there). It's probably irrelevant information,
> but I wonder whether the (V)machine worked well enough for a while before
> you first powered down and spotted the problem, or whether it's never got
> much further than trying to run init (busybox)? I'm trying to get a feel
> for whether the problem occurs under common or uncommon conditions.
>
> > Unfortunately, I can still
> > reproduce it with the existing fix you have for this change on the
> > mailing list, which is present in next-20230614.
>
> Right, that later fix was only for a build warning, nothing functional
> (or at least I hoped that it wasn't making any functional difference).
>
> Thanks a lot for the detailed instructions below: unfortunately, those
> would draw me into a realm of testing I've never needed to enter before,
> so a lot of time spent on setup and learning. Usually, I just stare at
> the source.
>
> What this probably says is that I should revert most my cleanup there,
> and keep as close to the existing code as possible. But some change is
> needed, and I may need to understand (or have a good guess at) what was
> going wrong, to decide what kind of retreat will be successful.
>
> Back to the source for a while: I hope I'll find examples in nearby MIPS
> kernel source (and git history), which will hint at the right way forward.
> Then send you a patch against next-20230614 to try, when I'm reasonably
> confident that it's enough to satisfy my purpose, but likely not to waste
> your time.
I'm going to take advantage of your good nature by attaching
two alternative patches, either to go on top of next-20230614.
mips1.patch,
arch/mips/mm/tlb-r4k.c | 12 +-----------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 11 deletions(-)
is by far my favourite. I couldn't see anything wrong with what's
already there for mips, but it seems possible that (though I didn't
find it) somewhere calls update_mmu_cache_pmd() on a page table. So
mips1.patch restores the pmd_huge() check, and cleans up further by
removing the silly pgdp, p4dp, pudp, pmdp stuff: the pointer has now
been passed in by the caller, why walk the tree again? I should have
done it this way before.
But if that doesn't work, then I'm afraid it will have to be
mips2.patch,
arch/mips/include/asm/pgtable.h | 15 ++++++++++++---
arch/mips/mm/tlb-r3k.c | 5 ++---
arch/mips/mm/tlb-r4k.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
which reverts all of the original patch and its build warning fix,
and does a pte_unmap() to balance the silly pte_offset_map() there;
with an apologetic comment for this being about the only place in
the tree where I have no idea what to do if ptep were NULL.
I do hope that you find the first fixes the breakage; but if not, then
I even more fervently hope that the second will, despite my hating it.
Touch wood for the first, fingers crossed for the second, thanks,
Hugh
View attachment "mips1.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (900 bytes)
View attachment "mips2.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (3927 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists