Re: Not really merged? Re: [merged] x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode.patchremoved from -mm tree

[Stefan Bader]

On 28.10.2011 09:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:08:39 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>
>> * Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:24:50 -0400
>>> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:51:48PM -0700, akpm@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch titled
>>>>>      Subject: x86/paravirt: PTE updates in k(un)map_atomic need to be synchronous, regardless of lazy_mmu mode
>>>>> has been removed from the -mm tree.  Its filename was
>>>>>      x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode.patch
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree
>>>>
>>>> Hey Andrew,
>>>>
>>>> I am actually not seeing this in mainline? Was it accidently dropped out of your tree?
>>>
>>> hm, well spotted.  I'm not sure what happened here - possibly the 
>>> patch was merged into an x86 tree (and hence linux-next) but later 
>>> got lost. Or possibly not, and I just screwed up.
>>
>> No, a patch with the -i 'paravirt.*lazy' pattern never touched -tip, 
>> even temporarily.
>>
>> Could it be that someone else (say the Xen guys) picked it up, it 
>> went into linux-next, you thought it's applied - but then they 
>> dropped it?
>>
>> Do we have a full log of all linux-next patches?
> 
> Don't know.
> 
> The patch was present in the linux-next which I pulled on 14 Oct.  It
> is no longer in linux-next.
> 

So, as of today, this seems to be back on the master branch of linux-next (I
guess from Andrew putting it back, but I am never sure with linux-next). But I
am not sure how/when this would go into Linus tree. I assume without any
specific action maybe merge window for 3.3...
We got some positive feedback on it from users running into the problem. So it
seems like a valuable change. From the discusions so far I take that technically
the change did not trigger resistance. For that reason I wanted to ask whether
there is a chance that this looks important enough to be pushed before the next
merge window...

Thanks,
Stefan

> Here's my copy:
> 
> 
> From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: x86/paravirt: PTE updates in k(un)map_atomic need to be synchronous, regardless of lazy_mmu mode
> 
> Fix an outstanding issue that has been reported since 2.6.37.  Under a
> heavy loaded machine processing "fork()" calls could crash with:
> 
> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at f573fc8c
> IP: [<c01abc54>] swap_count_continued+0x104/0x180
> *pdpt = 000000002a3b9027 *pde = 0000000001bed067 *pte = 0000000000000000
> Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
> Modules linked in:
> Pid: 1638, comm: apache2 Not tainted 3.0.4-linode37 #1
> EIP: 0061:[<c01abc54>] EFLAGS: 00210246 CPU: 3
> EIP is at swap_count_continued+0x104/0x180
> .. snip..
> Call Trace:
>  [<c01ac222>] ? __swap_duplicate+0xc2/0x160
>  [<c01040f7>] ? pte_mfn_to_pfn+0x87/0xe0
>  [<c01ac2e4>] ? swap_duplicate+0x14/0x40
>  [<c01a0a6b>] ? copy_pte_range+0x45b/0x500
>  [<c01a0ca5>] ? copy_page_range+0x195/0x200
>  [<c01328c6>] ? dup_mmap+0x1c6/0x2c0
>  [<c0132cf8>] ? dup_mm+0xa8/0x130
>  [<c013376a>] ? copy_process+0x98a/0xb30
>  [<c013395f>] ? do_fork+0x4f/0x280
>  [<c01573b3>] ? getnstimeofday+0x43/0x100
>  [<c010f770>] ? sys_clone+0x30/0x40
>  [<c06c048d>] ? ptregs_clone+0x15/0x48
>  [<c06bfb71>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
> 
> The problem is that in copy_page_range() we turn lazy mode on, and then in
> swap_entry_free() we call swap_count_continued() which ends up in:
> 
>          map = kmap_atomic(page, KM_USER0) + offset;
> 
> and then later we touch *map.
> 
> Since we are running in batched mode (lazy) we don't actually set up the
> PTE mappings and the kmap_atomic is not done synchronously and ends up
> trying to dereference a page that has not been set.
> 
> Looking at kmap_atomic_prot_pfn(), it uses 'arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode' and
> doing the same in kmap_atomic_prot() and __kunmap_atomic() makes the problem
> go away.
> 
> Interestingly, commit b8bcfe997e4615 ("x86/paravirt: remove lazy mode in
> interrupts") removed part of this to fix an interrupt issue - but it went
> to far and did not consider this scenario.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
>  arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c |    2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff -puN arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c~x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c~x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode
> +++ a/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ void *kmap_atomic_prot(struct page *page
>  	vaddr = __fix_to_virt(FIX_KMAP_BEGIN + idx);
>  	BUG_ON(!pte_none(*(kmap_pte-idx)));
>  	set_pte(kmap_pte-idx, mk_pte(page, prot));
> +	arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode();
>  
>  	return (void *)vaddr;
>  }
> @@ -88,6 +89,7 @@ void __kunmap_atomic(void *kvaddr)
>  		 */
>  		kpte_clear_flush(kmap_pte-idx, vaddr);
>  		kmap_atomic_idx_pop();
> +		arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode();
>  	}
>  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_HIGHMEM
>  	else {
> _
> 
> 
>> But IMO it's at least as important to figure out what went wrong. I 
>> somehow doubt it that you spuriously dropped it - that someone else 
>> messes up has a far higher likelihood.
> 
> My drop was legitimate. 
> 
> Here's the commit from the Oct 14 linux-next:
> 
> 
> commit ab67482036cee590753dd42b7f66aada97e6dcde
> Author:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> AuthorDate: Fri Sep 23 17:02:29 2011 -0400
> Commit:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CommitDate: Mon Sep 26 09:12:37 2011 -0400
> 
>     x86/paravirt: Partially revert "remove lazy mode in interrupts"
>     
>     which has git commit b8bcfe997e46150fedcc3f5b26b846400122fdd9.
>     
>     The unintended consequence of removing the flushing of MMU
>     updates when doing kmap_atomic (or kunmap_atomic) is that we can
>     hit a dereference bug when processing a "fork()" under a heavy loaded
>     machine. Specifically we can hit:
>     
>     BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at f573fc8c
>     IP: [<c01abc54>] swap_count_continued+0x104/0x180
>     *pdpt = 000000002a3b9027 *pde = 0000000001bed067 *pte = 0000000000000000
>     Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
>     Modules linked in:
>     Pid: 1638, comm: apache2 Not tainted 3.0.4-linode37 #1
>     EIP: 0061:[<c01abc54>] EFLAGS: 00210246 CPU: 3
>     EIP is at swap_count_continued+0x104/0x180
>     .. snip..
>     Call Trace:
>      [<c01ac222>] ? __swap_duplicate+0xc2/0x160
>      [<c01040f7>] ? pte_mfn_to_pfn+0x87/0xe0
>      [<c01ac2e4>] ? swap_duplicate+0x14/0x40
>      [<c01a0a6b>] ? copy_pte_range+0x45b/0x500
>      [<c01a0ca5>] ? copy_page_range+0x195/0x200
>      [<c01328c6>] ? dup_mmap+0x1c6/0x2c0
>      [<c0132cf8>] ? dup_mm+0xa8/0x130
>      [<c013376a>] ? copy_process+0x98a/0xb30
>      [<c013395f>] ? do_fork+0x4f/0x280
>      [<c01573b3>] ? getnstimeofday+0x43/0x100
>      [<c010f770>] ? sys_clone+0x30/0x40
>      [<c06c048d>] ? ptregs_clone+0x15/0x48
>      [<c06bfb71>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
>     
>     The problem looks that in copy_page_range we turn lazy mode on, and then
>     in swap_entry_free we call swap_count_continued which ends up in:
>     
>              map = kmap_atomic(page, KM_USER0) + offset;
>     
>     and then later touches *map.
>     
>     Since we are running in batched mode (lazy) we don't actually set up the
>     PTE mappings and the kmap_atomic is not done synchronously and ends up
>     trying to dereference a page that has not been set.
>     
>     Looking at kmap_atomic_prot_pfn, it uses 'arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode' and
>     sprinkling that in kmap_atomic_prot and __kunmap_atomic makes the problem
>     go away.
>     
>     CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>     CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
>     CC: x86@xxxxxxxxxx
>     CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
>     CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>
>     CC: stable@xxxxxxxxxx
>     Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c b/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c
> index b499626..f4f29b1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ void *kmap_atomic_prot(struct page *page, pgprot_t prot)
>  	vaddr = __fix_to_virt(FIX_KMAP_BEGIN + idx);
>  	BUG_ON(!pte_none(*(kmap_pte-idx)));
>  	set_pte(kmap_pte-idx, mk_pte(page, prot));
> +	arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode();
>  
>  	return (void *)vaddr;
>  }
> @@ -88,6 +89,7 @@ void __kunmap_atomic(void *kvaddr)
>  		 */
>  		kpte_clear_flush(kmap_pte-idx, vaddr);
>  		kmap_atomic_idx_pop();
> +		arch_flush_lazy_mmu_mode();
>  	}
>  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_HIGHMEM
>  	else {
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what to make of that.  The signoffs imply that Konrad is
> running his own git tree, but I don't think he is.  Or someone (Jeremy
> or Rusty I think) merged it but didn't add a signoff.
> 
> Note that the patch was merged using its old name "x86/paravirt:
> Partially revert "remove lazy mode in interrupts"".  The patch got
> renamed to "x86/paravirt: PTE updates in k(un)map_atomic need to be
> synchronous, regardless of lazy_mmu mode" and perhaps this prompted
> someone to drop the old-named patch then lose the new-named one.
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/