Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 25 May 2023 18:03:59 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To:     Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: mm: pass original fault address to
 handle_mm_fault() in PER_VMA_LOCK block
Message-ID: <ZG+U/70SxgfaM6sl@arm.com>
References: <20230524131305.2808-1-jszhang@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230524131305.2808-1-jszhang@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 09:13:05PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> When reading the arm64's PER_VMA_LOCK support code, I found a bit
> difference between arm64 and other arch when calling handle_mm_fault()
> during VMA lock-based page fault handling: the fault address is masked
> before passing to handle_mm_fault(). This is also different from the
> usage in mmap_lock-based handling. I think we need to pass the
> original fault address to handle_mm_fault() as we did in
> commit 84c5e23edecd ("arm64: mm: Pass original fault address to
> handle_mm_fault()").
> 
> If we go through the code path further, we can find that the "masked"
> fault address can cause mismatched fault address between perf sw
> major/minor page fault sw event and perf page fault sw event:
> 
> do_page_fault
>   perf_sw_event(PERF_COUNT_SW_PAGE_FAULTS, ..., addr)   // orig addr
>   handle_mm_fault
>     mm_account_fault
>       perf_sw_event(PERF_COUNT_SW_PAGE_FAULTS_MAJ, ...) // masked addr
> 
> Fixes: cd7f176aea5f ("arm64/mm: try VMA lock-based page fault handling first")
> Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>

Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>