preempted dup_mm misses TLB invalidate

Nickolas Fortino nfortino at
Wed Jul 17 16:09:52 EDT 2013

On 7/17/2013 12:52 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 01:27 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 07:19:23PM +0100, Nickolas Fortino wrote:
>>> The page tables have a page marked as user read only, but the TLB has
>>> the page marked as user read/write.
>> This happens during fork() for the current process. I think mprotect()
>> as well. The caller is supposed not to have threads that write its
>> memory while another thread does a fork().

To be clear, the complaint is not that the page tables are ephemerally 
out of sync with the TLBs. I agree that is part of the expected 
operation of fork(), and if a TLB invalidate occurs prior to any memory 
access the code is valid.

The problem is eventually a user process performs a store which hits on 
a writeable TLB entry with the PTE marked as read only. Is it supposed 
to be possible for a user threading bug to end up in this state? I would 
have expected the kernel to be responsible for assuring no stores occur 
to a page it has marked as read only.

As for whether the application is threaded, it almost certainly is - 
it's cfbench equivalent to

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list