Received: by 2002:a25:c593:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v141csp84120ybe; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:18:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyGysol6LGQZs6TNjqnsv7TlLlhpsBmVH0/qCCak1pNd6DBd+rjhg1Z548TZ9OMPPxviuN0 X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:10c5:: with SMTP id rv5mr11122419ejb.262.1568837904705; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:18:24 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1568837904; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=KqFlg/bGmuXrp4i3mAMjw1AmHHmaffPQVjj2l1I5jC1xctYMQmqPGIvLYGVURcsArH cyMglpcWeF2vF3CgWXmVFCZnpLSrY2iiJ0oMAWekVclqKVrf9mniITZE4CGzuF+4/BHG PAVyTWmd5HLGgkmiHyz308UBDKxY7X7FT0D3wReYAm2rFVswRfN7Lt6ZsGtzDZJeRSm5 9LLQE7OZp7xIvlWfxQSD56Fzk+PWX8yOuWwOqpeXnkDDGczEuGh85K2Klx5QjmI4yQRX oy07n+R+8ZCCX0XwuW2sJKNPC0LNphFjg13GSDP1CmKimCrp1N5D+UWWzMAFzqmdu32w 3zVg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=j2UHjQKs2OgxGL6R7ikxpfBY/dljbR15qg+7qfxHjcE=; b=G+4X1MI3nn6yhh7p3Lmx6pBqqBPdCl84udPlhsLMuezAvyJ9VFMmHntpOq1ee8WBfD yOG1dEBYaghQsE9iGNL5U86oh62KXxcf89JPwb2X5vsXLiZuAv/81PlC3nSjgIU7MEZ2 LLPRW08grDENSxj92Cr+2296ggIufEVo4ZnHEV/y27NRRuzYkJ47pPw1cSceEF/KJoUZ GfckMavUHayr7RSLMH9bNNuXK4U+lO8ITg04zlfUwoZtCHAq55gH27o1YLu/+I2sCEQL fugl9oLf005ygHEgIS8IK3M5etwa2ZukESt5oLuhqz0QKLwcksPok9rsPJhCDM6FqMrV kFEg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@shutemov-name.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=IZjWryCw; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j34si3980628ede.10.2019.09.18.13.17.48; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:18:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@shutemov-name.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=IZjWryCw; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731089AbfIROA2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 18 Sep 2019 10:00:28 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f67.google.com ([209.85.208.67]:33593 "EHLO mail-ed1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726038AbfIROA2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Sep 2019 10:00:28 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f67.google.com with SMTP id c4so117956edl.0 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:00:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=shutemov-name.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=j2UHjQKs2OgxGL6R7ikxpfBY/dljbR15qg+7qfxHjcE=; b=IZjWryCw0rr2uH7QX0RsTwStJaFrk2aI+h1A5E1rlDUjawxjtZsoOZQQfPACpoV7Yq vq1SOvaeE3pD6n2p95uruz94PuqO6FGKZfKPiDMQrZXrmvrQuv0gcJqNrOSqx5NS/bCi ibiFGPnpTVNSsANXpfZGCsO7aRL5639d38/3q9otDkeEBcKPn24pWTWhwpwS3fLY4lpt SBmj+KeOXdvbTX6tbSrPjaBJy0u5gCrTEYH1YmqZTTUe7LzXjyFIWNfdAu52ziYgvOKv ktSSfLnxeyy0uOOjeeBAwggWKd4EPjyJRU4+CD3IOKozB5XAujmov9nvf1F+fV9ZjWba rtqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=j2UHjQKs2OgxGL6R7ikxpfBY/dljbR15qg+7qfxHjcE=; b=T2/euObGDwGzf6eeMElCK5SIRHQ4U4+ueNsBcxI2vkZNBBxjSMBobXnjj8VHKaZDSJ QxKwtOJmP4Afi3gmpWbMB5RO53CKdFGTLWG1sZH3Pcculcx1y3/lLmQ/9Isd+lV0Gvaw 1PWkZrNdYTVA1YowljLsbm9AlDRdyLcuyxjKBYP+OytJdxlP9uwFrCp6TMWHbM44pI3+ dSOle7XGuHOjSCY4EhosuwNV68DdVgddoQe7riKqX4MRNlj6FC7MewVcAWuWlLtJtnlO p8Gi/9QnONrYURy0mCkNf7S/IetCQvKTL01fGCUQn5Cxy/9w+A7JRY5HZdm9HZ9CPRv7 8XMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUVaP+fn5aGb96EXygEvC+0P5yXh+hR2HNpF4kHgdK4fJPQSjiH TwvSZDnhuHHvIRuVcTtiTqsFAbPe9/w= X-Received: by 2002:a50:ef02:: with SMTP id m2mr1236847eds.157.1568815225760; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:00:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from box.localdomain ([86.57.175.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f29sm1061454eda.76.2019.09.18.07.00.24 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by box.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E6C62101B27; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 17:00:27 +0300 (+03) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 17:00:27 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Jia He Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , James Morse , Marc Zyngier , Matthew Wilcox , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Suzuki Poulose , Punit Agrawal , Anshuman Khandual , Jun Yao , Alex Van Brunt , Robin Murphy , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , =?utf-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWU=?= Glisse , Ralph Campbell , hejianet@gmail.com, Kaly Xin Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] mm: fix double page fault on arm64 if PTE_AF is cleared Message-ID: <20190918140027.ckj32xnryyyesc23@box> References: <20190918131914.38081-1-justin.he@arm.com> <20190918131914.38081-4-justin.he@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190918131914.38081-4-justin.he@arm.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 09:19:14PM +0800, Jia He wrote: > When we tested pmdk unit test [1] vmmalloc_fork TEST1 in arm64 guest, there > will be a double page fault in __copy_from_user_inatomic of cow_user_page. > > Below call trace is from arm64 do_page_fault for debugging purpose > [ 110.016195] Call trace: > [ 110.016826] do_page_fault+0x5a4/0x690 > [ 110.017812] do_mem_abort+0x50/0xb0 > [ 110.018726] el1_da+0x20/0xc4 > [ 110.019492] __arch_copy_from_user+0x180/0x280 > [ 110.020646] do_wp_page+0xb0/0x860 > [ 110.021517] __handle_mm_fault+0x994/0x1338 > [ 110.022606] handle_mm_fault+0xe8/0x180 > [ 110.023584] do_page_fault+0x240/0x690 > [ 110.024535] do_mem_abort+0x50/0xb0 > [ 110.025423] el0_da+0x20/0x24 > > The pte info before __copy_from_user_inatomic is (PTE_AF is cleared): > [ffff9b007000] pgd=000000023d4f8003, pud=000000023da9b003, pmd=000000023d4b3003, pte=360000298607bd3 > > As told by Catalin: "On arm64 without hardware Access Flag, copying from > user will fail because the pte is old and cannot be marked young. So we > always end up with zeroed page after fork() + CoW for pfn mappings. we > don't always have a hardware-managed access flag on arm64." > > This patch fix it by calling pte_mkyoung. Also, the parameter is > changed because vmf should be passed to cow_user_page() > > [1] https://github.com/pmem/pmdk/tree/master/src/test/vmmalloc_fork > > Reported-by: Yibo Cai > Signed-off-by: Jia He > --- > mm/memory.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c > index e2bb51b6242e..d2c130a5883b 100644 > --- a/mm/memory.c > +++ b/mm/memory.c > @@ -118,6 +118,13 @@ int randomize_va_space __read_mostly = > 2; > #endif > > +#ifndef arch_faults_on_old_pte > +static inline bool arch_faults_on_old_pte(void) > +{ > + return false; > +} > +#endif > + > static int __init disable_randmaps(char *s) > { > randomize_va_space = 0; > @@ -2140,8 +2147,12 @@ static inline int pte_unmap_same(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd, > return same; > } > > -static inline void cow_user_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src, unsigned long va, struct vm_area_struct *vma) > +static inline void cow_user_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src, > + struct vm_fault *vmf) > { > + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma; > + unsigned long addr = vmf->address; > + > debug_dma_assert_idle(src); > > /* > @@ -2152,20 +2163,34 @@ static inline void cow_user_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src, unsigned lo > */ > if (unlikely(!src)) { > void *kaddr = kmap_atomic(dst); > - void __user *uaddr = (void __user *)(va & PAGE_MASK); > + void __user *uaddr = (void __user *)(addr & PAGE_MASK); > + pte_t entry; > > /* > * This really shouldn't fail, because the page is there > * in the page tables. But it might just be unreadable, > * in which case we just give up and fill the result with > - * zeroes. > + * zeroes. On architectures with software "accessed" bits, > + * we would take a double page fault here, so mark it > + * accessed here. > */ > + if (arch_faults_on_old_pte() && !pte_young(vmf->orig_pte)) { > + spin_lock(vmf->ptl); > + if (likely(pte_same(*vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte))) { > + entry = pte_mkyoung(vmf->orig_pte); > + if (ptep_set_access_flags(vma, addr, > + vmf->pte, entry, 0)) > + update_mmu_cache(vma, addr, vmf->pte); > + } I don't follow. So if pte has changed under you, you don't set the accessed bit, but never the less copy from the user. What makes you think it will not trigger the same problem? I think we need to make cow_user_page() fail in this case and caller -- wp_page_copy() -- return zero. If the fault was solved by other thread, we are fine. If not userspace would re-fault on the same address and we will handle the fault from the second attempt. > + spin_unlock(vmf->ptl); > + } > + > if (__copy_from_user_inatomic(kaddr, uaddr, PAGE_SIZE)) > clear_page(kaddr); > kunmap_atomic(kaddr); > flush_dcache_page(dst); > } else > - copy_user_highpage(dst, src, va, vma); > + copy_user_highpage(dst, src, addr, vma); > } > > static gfp_t __get_fault_gfp_mask(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > @@ -2318,7 +2343,7 @@ static vm_fault_t wp_page_copy(struct vm_fault *vmf) > vmf->address); > if (!new_page) > goto oom; > - cow_user_page(new_page, old_page, vmf->address, vma); > + cow_user_page(new_page, old_page, vmf); > } > > if (mem_cgroup_try_charge_delay(new_page, mm, GFP_KERNEL, &memcg, false)) > -- > 2.17.1 > > -- Kirill A. Shutemov