linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: KVM/s390x regression

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <84349344-b127-41f6-99f1-10f907c2bd07@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 19:07:56 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>, balbirs@...dia.com
Cc: Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, airlied@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 apopple@...dia.com, baohua@...nel.org, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
 byungchul@...com, dakr@...nel.org, dev.jain@....com,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, francois.dugast@...el.com,
 gourry@...rry.net, joshua.hahnjy@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, lyude@...hat.com,
 matthew.brost@...el.com, mpenttil@...hat.com, npache@...hat.com,
 osalvador@...e.de, rakie.kim@...com, rcampbell@...dia.com,
 ryan.roberts@....com, simona@...ll.ch, ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com,
 ziy@...dia.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-next@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: KVM/s390x regression

On 17.10.25 17:20, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 17.10.25 um 17:07 schrieb David Hildenbrand:
>> On 17.10.25 17:01, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>> Am 17.10.25 um 16:54 schrieb David Hildenbrand:
>>>> On 17.10.25 16:49, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>>> This patch triggers a regression for s390x kvm as qemu guests can no longer start
>>>>>
>>>>> error: kvm run failed Cannot allocate memory
>>>>> PSW=mask 0000000180000000 addr 000000007fd00600
>>>>> R00=0000000000000000 R01=0000000000000000 R02=0000000000000000 R03=0000000000000000
>>>>> R04=0000000000000000 R05=0000000000000000 R06=0000000000000000 R07=0000000000000000
>>>>> R08=0000000000000000 R09=0000000000000000 R10=0000000000000000 R11=0000000000000000
>>>>> R12=0000000000000000 R13=0000000000000000 R14=0000000000000000 R15=0000000000000000
>>>>> C00=00000000000000e0 C01=0000000000000000 C02=0000000000000000 C03=0000000000000000
>>>>> C04=0000000000000000 C05=0000000000000000 C06=0000000000000000 C07=0000000000000000
>>>>> C08=0000000000000000 C09=0000000000000000 C10=0000000000000000 C11=0000000000000000
>>>>> C12=0000000000000000 C13=0000000000000000 C14=00000000c2000000 C15=0000000000000000
>>>>>
>>>>> KVM on s390x does not use THP so far, will investigate. Does anyone have a quick idea?
>>>>
>>>> Only when running KVM guests and apart from that everything else seems to be fine?
>>>
>>> We have other weirdness in linux-next but in different areas. Could that somehow be
>>> related to use disabling THP for the kvm address space?
>>
>> Not sure ... it's a bit weird. I mean, when KVM disables THPs we essentially just remap everything to be mapped by PTEs. So there shouldn't be any PMDs in that whole process.
>>
>> Remapping a file THP (shmem) implies zapping the THP completely.
>>
>>
>> I assume in your kernel config has CONFIG_ZONE_DEVICE and CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_THP_MIGRATION set, right?
> 
> yes.
> 
>>
>> I'd rule out copy_huge_pmd(), zap_huge_pmd() a well.
>>
>>
>> What happens if you revert the change in mm/pgtable-generic.c?
> 
> That partial revert seems to fix the issue
> diff --git a/mm/pgtable-generic.c b/mm/pgtable-generic.c
> index 0c847cdf4fd3..567e2d084071 100644
> --- a/mm/pgtable-generic.c
> +++ b/mm/pgtable-generic.c
> @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ pte_t *___pte_offset_map(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, pmd_t *pmdvalp)
>    
>           if (pmdvalp)
>                   *pmdvalp = pmdval;
> -       if (unlikely(pmd_none(pmdval) || !pmd_present(pmdval)))
> +       if (unlikely(pmd_none(pmdval) || is_pmd_migration_entry(pmdval)))

Okay, but that means that effectively we stumble over a PMD entry that 
is not a migration entry but still non-present.

And I would expect that it's a page table, because otherwise the change
wouldn't make a difference.

And the weird thing is that this only triggers sometimes, because if
it would always trigger nothing would ever work.

Is there some weird scenario where s390x might set a left page table 
mapped in a PMD to non-present?

Staring at the definition of pmd_present() on s390x it's really just

	return (pmd_val(pmd) & _SEGMENT_ENTRY_PRESENT) != 0;


Maybe this is happening in the gmap code only and not actually in the 
core-mm code?

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb