[PATCH v17 1/1] arm64: mm: Handle Granule Protection Faults (GPFs)
Suzuki K Poulose
suzuki.poulose at arm.com
Thu Sep 10 11:52:32 PDT 2026
On 10/09/2026 18:45, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2026 at 05:22:04PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> index 0b52557652be6..ad00997b1a873 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> @@ -910,6 +910,22 @@ static int do_tag_check_fault(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int do_gpf_ptw(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> +{
>> + const struct fault_info *inf = esr_to_fault_info(esr);
>> +
>> + die_kernel_fault(inf->name, far, esr, regs);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int do_gpf(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> +{
>> + if (!is_el1_instruction_abort(esr) && fixup_exception(regs, esr))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + return 1;
>> +}
>
> If we end up with a user PC here, we correctly return 1 but only because
> fixup_exception() won't find the PC. I'd rather have this explicit with
> a user_mode() check.
Sure, I have made the condtion to:
+ if (!user_mode(regs) && !is_el1_instruction_abort(esr) &&
+ fixup_exception(regs, esr))
+ return 0;
>
>> +
>> static const struct fault_info fault_info[] = {
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "ttbr address size fault" },
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level 1 address size fault" },
>> @@ -946,12 +962,12 @@ static const struct fault_info fault_info[] = {
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 32" },
>> { do_alignment_fault, SIGBUS, BUS_ADRALN, "alignment fault" },
>> { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 34" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 35" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 36" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 37" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 38" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 39" },
>> - { do_bad, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "unknown 40" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level -1 granule protection fault (translation table walk)" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level 0 granule protection fault (translation table walk)" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level 1 granule protection fault (translation table walk)" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level 2 granule protection fault (translation table walk)" },
>> + { do_gpf_ptw, SIGKILL, SI_KERNEL, "level 3 granule protection fault (translation table walk)" },
>> + { do_gpf, SIGBUS, SI_KERNEL, "granule protection fault" },
>
> For SIGBUS, we should use BUS_OBJERR like we do for do_sea().
Good point, I have added that.
>
> Otherwise it looks fine to me.
Thanks, I have already added the untagged_addr() as reported by Sashiko.
>
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
Cheers
Suzuki
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list