[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240531005007.1600287-1-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 08:50:07 +0800
From: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki
<urezki@...il.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes
<lstoakes@...il.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner
<tglx@...utronix.de>,
hailong liu <hailong.liu@...o.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Zhaoyang Huang
<huangzhaoyang@...il.com>, <steve.kang@...soc.com>
Subject: [PATCHv2] mm: fix incorrect vbq reference in purge_fragmented_block
From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
vmalloc area runs out in our ARM64 system during an erofs test as
vm_map_ram failed[1]. By following the debug log, we find that
vm_map_ram()->vb_alloc() will allocate new vb->va which corresponding
to 4MB vmalloc area as list_for_each_entry_rcu returns immediately
when vbq->free->next points to vbq->free. That is to say, 65536 times
of page fault after the list's broken will run out of the whole
vmalloc area. This should be introduced by one vbq->free->next point to
vbq->free which makes list_for_each_entry_rcu can not iterate the list
and find the BUG.
[1]
PID: 1 TASK: ffffff80802b4e00 CPU: 6 COMMAND: "init"
#0 [ffffffc08006afe0] __switch_to at ffffffc08111d5cc
#1 [ffffffc08006b040] __schedule at ffffffc08111dde0
#2 [ffffffc08006b0a0] schedule at ffffffc08111e294
#3 [ffffffc08006b0d0] schedule_preempt_disabled at ffffffc08111e3f0
#4 [ffffffc08006b140] __mutex_lock at ffffffc08112068c
#5 [ffffffc08006b180] __mutex_lock_slowpath at ffffffc08111f8f8
#6 [ffffffc08006b1a0] mutex_lock at ffffffc08111f834
#7 [ffffffc08006b1d0] reclaim_and_purge_vmap_areas at ffffffc0803ebc3c
#8 [ffffffc08006b290] alloc_vmap_area at ffffffc0803e83fc
#9 [ffffffc08006b300] vm_map_ram at ffffffc0803e78c0
Fixes: fc1e0d980037 ("mm/vmalloc: prevent stale TLBs in fully utilized blocks")
Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
---
v2: introduce cpu in vmap_block to record the right CPU number
---
---
mm/vmalloc.c | 11 +++++++----
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index 22aa63f4ef63..ca962b554fa0 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -2458,6 +2458,7 @@ struct vmap_block {
struct list_head free_list;
struct rcu_head rcu_head;
struct list_head purge;
+ unsigned int cpu;
};
/* Queue of free and dirty vmap blocks, for allocation and flushing purposes */
@@ -2574,6 +2575,7 @@ static void *new_vmap_block(unsigned int order, gfp_t gfp_mask)
vb->dirty = 0;
vb->dirty_min = VMAP_BBMAP_BITS;
vb->dirty_max = 0;
+ vb->cpu = smp_processor_id();
bitmap_set(vb->used_map, 0, (1UL << order));
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vb->free_list);
@@ -2614,9 +2616,10 @@ static void free_vmap_block(struct vmap_block *vb)
}
static bool purge_fragmented_block(struct vmap_block *vb,
- struct vmap_block_queue *vbq, struct list_head *purge_list,
- bool force_purge)
+ struct list_head *purge_list, bool force_purge)
{
+ struct vmap_block_queue *vbq = &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, vb->cpu);
+
if (vb->free + vb->dirty != VMAP_BBMAP_BITS ||
vb->dirty == VMAP_BBMAP_BITS)
return false;
@@ -2664,7 +2667,7 @@ static void purge_fragmented_blocks(int cpu)
continue;
spin_lock(&vb->lock);
- purge_fragmented_block(vb, vbq, &purge, true);
+ purge_fragmented_block(vb, &purge, true);
spin_unlock(&vb->lock);
}
rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -2801,7 +2804,7 @@ static void _vm_unmap_aliases(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int flush)
* not purgeable, check whether there is dirty
* space to be flushed.
*/
- if (!purge_fragmented_block(vb, vbq, &purge_list, false) &&
+ if (!purge_fragmented_block(vb, &purge_list, false) &&
vb->dirty_max && vb->dirty != VMAP_BBMAP_BITS) {
unsigned long va_start = vb->va->va_start;
unsigned long s, e;
--
2.25.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists