Received: by 2002:a25:1985:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 127csp143359ybz; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 18:14:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypL5eJnw9MCpbyRMoaSxYDmdBaGXNfs3WBoOtzBRTq3Tg7b3d7UJenjMQtwK9N6aYtwrMpok X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:435d:: with SMTP id oc21mr1182136ejb.100.1588295698665; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 18:14:58 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1588295698; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=oKcDqcW4wbNTuHJHJ/Txx1f0Qdt4/yw8wf957hmwsG4CNovrKi+IvrwcSAzzLpdrPw +vtatuxMbJ3r8EsjFbDWj+W1D9D/dBfsx0GJ0sHOZkbpjGsbpzkTPxQkrhITj/leTsVS 21Diym6g7Yig7NlamTIlnHqnQOu+01Xx1xrJpLUbJeymQvodG3x2Sjk/RJtIv7pqervF J+a3NIa8lrFWD4uBogks8kNct7WA1u1wXGQK9DZ/kQVntUFbuoBJ+Fy07+oNVf/pK8QF FtlJjSDuK7OAq09USURQTVA1pS1d7su8ydLx3V/8eSShEW580vsRgbe8QgbyMCQX6H8q 1I4Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=9WLb1FWXBDt1HKlz0K0r3Ur+DlD+PdS1LzykF9W0jDU=; b=C5vxwMfS32IOv1Yc9G70vRs8U+GeYjATNEXlDGEZbItET/fKoquj6BwYKfRdrLIcXf WNz5xpw4S29KaR/7RBISYQlkHqjVt8fcJ45sSTX4asoqOYSZYcQBOJGXn94K2Z00HKuj p0sMJa2h1vbtWdKBy8e1SqjA8moABLe8jSWpIs7XDf5Y28wckI0LDDI9SSrHyOFfwtvf 1yfQYvnJJwSTHFXOGWzM4CJiOVy99rtB6643PxVjYjUyhHRFw3HSgj+o/LKXNm9J2wWs f/reCQMqamQL6AMhqeTMgo0F/AB9cEouhSXop5GVrTmUxqgH2C13xF6H4f7skBqknPcu FRKQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id l27si791381edj.537.2020.04.30.18.14.34; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 18:14:58 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727948AbgEABNM (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 30 Apr 2020 21:13:12 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:41778 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727114AbgEABNM (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2020 21:13:12 -0400 Received: from oasis.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8FBD62074A; Fri, 1 May 2020 01:13:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 21:13:08 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Joerg Roedel Cc: LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Borislav Petkov , Andrew Morton , Shile Zhang , Andy Lutomirski , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Dave Hansen , Tzvetomir Stoyanov , Mathieu Desnoyers Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86/mm: Sync all vmalloc mappings before text_poke() Message-ID: <20200430211308.74a994dc@oasis.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20200430191434.GC8135@suse.de> References: <20200429054857.66e8e333@oasis.local.home> <20200429105941.GQ30814@suse.de> <20200429082854.6e1796b5@oasis.local.home> <20200429100731.201312a9@gandalf.local.home> <20200430141120.GA8135@suse.de> <20200430121136.6d7aeb22@gandalf.local.home> <20200430191434.GC8135@suse.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [ Joerg, sending again this time not just to you. (hit reply to sender and not reply to all). Feel free to resend what you wrote before to this ] On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 21:14:34 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote: > And alloc_percpu() calls down into pcpu_alloc(), which allocates new > percpu chunks using vmalloc() on x86. And there we are again in the > vmalloc area. So after a vmalloc() is made, should the page tables be synced? This is a rather subtle bug, and I don't think it should be the caller of percpu_alloc() that needs to call vmalloc_sync_mappings(). What's your suggestion for a fix? -- Steve