Re: [PATCH] mm: allow page_cache_get_speculative in interrupt context
From: Kirill A. Shutemov
Date: Tue Aug 01 2017 - 16:52:05 EST
On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 08:31:14PM +0000, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 13:39:06 -0400 kan.liang@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Kernel panic when calling the IRQ-safe __get_user_pages_fast in NMI
> > > handler.
> > >
> > > The bug was introduced by commit:
> > >
> > > 2947ba054a4d ("x86/mm/gup: Switch GUP to the generic
> > > get_user_page_fast() implementation")
> > >
> > > The original x86 __get_user_page_fast used plain get_page() or
> > > page_ref_add(). However, the generic __get_user_page_fast uses
> > > page_cache_get_speculative(), which has VM_BUG_ON(in_interrupt()).
> > >
> > > There is no reason to prevent page_cache_get_speculative from using in
> > > interrupt context. According to the author, putting a BUG_ON there is
> > > just because the code is not verifying correctness of interrupt races.
> > > I did some tests in interrupt context. There is no issue found.
> > > Removing VM_BUG_ON(in_interrupt()) for page_cache_get_speculative().
> > What code calls page_cache_get_speculative() from NMI context?
> The code I'm implementing will call __get_user_page_fast from NMI context.
> __get_user_page_fast will eventually call page_cache_get_speculative().
> > I'm trying to work out which kernel versions need this fix, but there isn't
> > enough info in the changelog for this. Please don't do that.
> Sorry for the confusion.
> According to the comments, __get_user_page_fast should be IRQ-safe. But it's not.
> This patch could be used to resolve the inconsistencies between the comments
> and implementations for now.
> The generic __get_user_page_fast was introduced by the commit
> mm: introduce a general RCU get_user_pages_fast()
> I think the kernel after the commit should be fixed.
I don't think so.
It's 2+ year in and nobody stepped onto this until you with your patchset.
There is no real reason to get it backported.
Kirill A. Shutemov