[PATCH v1 3/5] mm: ptdump: Provide page size to notepage()
Steven Price
steven.price at arm.com
Fri Apr 16 14:00:28 BST 2021
On 16/04/2021 12:08, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 16/04/2021 à 12:51, Steven Price a écrit :
>> On 16/04/2021 11:38, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 16/04/2021 à 11:28, Steven Price a écrit :
>>>> On 15/04/2021 18:18, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>>> In order to support large pages on powerpc, notepage()
>>>>> needs to know the page size of the page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add a page_size argument to notepage().
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy at csgroup.eu>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> arch/arm64/mm/ptdump.c | 2 +-
>>>>> arch/riscv/mm/ptdump.c | 2 +-
>>>>> arch/s390/mm/dump_pagetables.c | 3 ++-
>>>>> arch/x86/mm/dump_pagetables.c | 2 +-
>>>>> include/linux/ptdump.h | 2 +-
>>>>> mm/ptdump.c | 16 ++++++++--------
>>>>> 6 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>> diff --git a/mm/ptdump.c b/mm/ptdump.c
>>>>> index da751448d0e4..61cd16afb1c8 100644
>>>>> --- a/mm/ptdump.c
>>>>> +++ b/mm/ptdump.c
>>>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ static inline int note_kasan_page_table(struct
>>>>> mm_walk *walk,
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct ptdump_state *st = walk->private;
>>>>> - st->note_page(st, addr, 4, pte_val(kasan_early_shadow_pte[0]));
>>>>> + st->note_page(st, addr, 4, pte_val(kasan_early_shadow_pte[0]),
>>>>> PAGE_SIZE);
>>>>
>>>> I'm not completely sure what the page_size is going to be used for,
>>>> but note that KASAN presents an interesting case here. We short-cut
>>>> by detecting it's a KASAN region at a high level (PGD/P4D/PUD/PMD)
>>>> and instead of walking the tree down just call note_page() *once*
>>>> but with level==4 because we know KASAN sets up the page table like
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> However the one call actually covers a much larger region - so while
>>>> PAGE_SIZE matches the level it doesn't match the region covered.
>>>> AFAICT this will lead to odd results if you enable KASAN on powerpc.
>>>
>>> Hum .... I successfully tested it with KASAN, I now realise that I
>>> tested it with CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC selected. In this situation,
>>> since https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/af3d0a686 we don't
>>> have any common shadow page table anymore.
>>>
>>> I'll test again without CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> To be honest I don't fully understand why powerpc requires the
>>>> page_size - it appears to be using it purely to find "holes" in the
>>>> calls to note_page(), but I haven't worked out why such holes would
>>>> occur.
>>>
>>> I was indeed introduced for KASAN. We have a first commit
>>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/cabe8138 which uses page
>>> size to detect whether it is a KASAN like stuff.
>>>
>>> Then came https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b00ff6d8c as a
>>> fix. I can't remember what the problem was exactly, something around
>>> the use of hugepages for kernel memory, came as part of the series
>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/cover/cover.1589866984.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu/
>>
>>
>>
>> Ah, that's useful context. So it looks like powerpc took a different
>> route to reducing the KASAN output to x86.
>>
>> Given the generic ptdump code has handling for KASAN already it should
>> be possible to drop that from the powerpc arch code, which I think
>> means we don't actually need to provide page size to notepage().
>> Hopefully that means more code to delete ;)
>>
>
> Yes ... and no.
>
> It looks like the generic ptdump handles the case when several pgdir
> entries points to the same kasan_early_shadow_pte. But it doesn't take
> into account the powerpc case where we have regular page tables where
> several (if not all) PTEs are pointing to the kasan_early_shadow_page .
I'm not sure I follow quite how powerpc is different here. But could you
have a similar check for PTEs against kasan_early_shadow_pte as the
other levels already have?
I'm just worried that page_size isn't well defined in this interface and
it's going to cause problems in the future.
Steve
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list