[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y1juxvmb.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2023 20:18:12 +0530
From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: 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>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>,
Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Zack Rusin <zackr@...are.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/31] mm/pgtable: allow pte_offset_map[_lock]() to fail
Hi Hugh,
Sorry for not checking about this before. I am looking at a kernel
crash (BUG_ON()) on ppc64 with 4K page size. The reason we hit
BUG_ON() is beause we have pmd_same calling BUG_ON on 4K with hash
translation. We don't support THP with 4k page size and hash
translation.
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> writes:
....
+
> +pte_t *pte_offset_map_nolock(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd,
> + unsigned long addr, spinlock_t **ptlp)
> +{
> + pmd_t pmdval;
> + pte_t *pte;
> +
> + pte = __pte_offset_map(pmd, addr, &pmdval);
> + if (likely(pte))
> + *ptlp = pte_lockptr(mm, &pmdval);
> + return pte;
> +}
> +
> +pte_t *__pte_offset_map_lock(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd,
> + unsigned long addr, spinlock_t **ptlp)
> +{
> + spinlock_t *ptl;
> + pmd_t pmdval;
> + pte_t *pte;
> +again:
> + pte = __pte_offset_map(pmd, addr, &pmdval);
> + if (unlikely(!pte))
> + return pte;
> + ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, &pmdval);
> + spin_lock(ptl);
> + if (likely(pmd_same(pmdval, pmdp_get_lockless(pmd)))) {
> + *ptlp = ptl;
> + return pte;
> + }
> + pte_unmap_unlock(pte, ptl);
> + goto again;
> +}
What is expected by that pmd_same check? We are holding pte lock
and not pmd lock. So contents of pmd can change.
-aneesh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists