[PATCH] arm64: contpte: fix set_access_flags() no-op check for SMMU/ATS faults
Piotr Jaroszynski
pjaroszynski at nvidia.com
Thu Mar 5 14:49:43 PST 2026
On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 05:33:25PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Looking at the patch again, some more comments.
>
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 10:37:51PM -0800, Piotr Jaroszynski wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> > index bcac4f55f9c1..9868bfe4607c 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> > @@ -390,6 +390,23 @@ void contpte_clear_young_dirty_ptes(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(contpte_clear_young_dirty_ptes);
> >
> > +static bool contpte_all_subptes_match_access_flags(pte_t *ptep, pte_t entry)
>
> More of a nitpick: since this checks both the flags and write
> permission, I'd rename to something else. Maybe contpte_ptep_same() to
> somewhat resemble pte_same() used by __ptep_set_access_flags().
pte_same() also compares the PFN though. I picked the _access_flags
suffix to match the ptep_set_access_flags() naming. I do agree the
aliasing of AF and "access flags" is unfortunate, but it seems
preexisting. I am updating the comments to be clearer in v2, let me know
if that works.
>
> > +{
> > + pte_t *cont_ptep = contpte_align_down(ptep);
> > + const pteval_t access_mask = PTE_RDONLY | PTE_AF | PTE_WRITE | PTE_DIRTY;
>
> We can drop the PTE_DIRTY from the mask as it's not relevant to the
> hardware permission. It probably doesn't matter in practice.
I think it's good to be consistent and just update everything while we
are doing it such that the sub-PTEs are in sync.
>
> > + pteval_t entry_access = pte_val(entry) & access_mask;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < CONT_PTES; i++) {
> > + pteval_t pte_access = pte_val(__ptep_get(cont_ptep + i)) & access_mask;
> > +
> > + if (pte_access != entry_access)
> > + return false;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return true;
> > +}
> > +
> > int contpte_ptep_set_access_flags(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep,
> > pte_t entry, int dirty)
> > @@ -399,13 +416,35 @@ int contpte_ptep_set_access_flags(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > int i;
> >
> > /*
> > - * Gather the access/dirty bits for the contiguous range. If nothing has
> > - * changed, its a noop.
> > + * Check whether all sub-PTEs in the CONT block already have the
> > + * requested access flags, using raw per-PTE values rather than the
> > + * gathered ptep_get() view.
>
> It's not just about the access flag but AF, dirty and write permission,
> all can be changed by this function (and only to a more permissive
> setting).
Thanks, updating the wording in v2.
>
> > + *
> > + * ptep_get() gathers AF/dirty state across the whole CONT block,
> > + * which is correct for CPU TLB semantics: with FEAT_HAFDBS the
> > + * hardware may set AF/dirty on any sub-PTE and the CPU TLB treats
> > + * the gathered result as authoritative for the entire range. But an
> > + * SMMU without HTTU (or with HA/HD disabled in CD.TCR) evaluates
>
> Or CPU equally, we don't force all CPUs in a system to support DBM.
Thanks, updating the wording in v2.
>
> > + * each descriptor individually and will keep faulting on the target
> > + * sub-PTE if its flags haven't actually been updated. Gathering can
> > + * therefore cause false no-ops when only a sibling has been updated:
> > + * - write faults: target still has PTE_RDONLY (needs PTE_RDONLY cleared)
> > + * - read faults: target still lacks PTE_AF
> > + *
> > + * Per Arm ARM (DDI 0487) D8.7.1, any sub-PTE in a CONT range may
> > + * become the effective cached translation, so all entries must have
> > + * consistent attributes. Check the full CONT block before returning
> > + * no-op, and when any sub-PTE mismatches, proceed to update the whole
> > + * range.
> > */
> > - orig_pte = pte_mknoncont(ptep_get(ptep));
> > - if (pte_val(orig_pte) == pte_val(entry))
> > + if (contpte_all_subptes_match_access_flags(ptep, entry))
> > return 0;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Use raw target pte (not gathered) for write-bit unfold decision.
> > + */
> > + orig_pte = pte_mknoncont(__ptep_get(ptep));
>
> This is fine since all should have the same PTE_WRITE bit.
>
> Anyway, nothing major, so:
>
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
Thanks!
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list