From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>,
Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@arm.com>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/mm: unpoison pages in memory-failure teardown
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 11:38:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <067fdf0f-7322-c011-0f2a-882dc63f0964@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <744290ab-b5b3-40b4-bb70-006231fcb328@kernel.org>
On 2026/7/29 3:06, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 7/28/26 16:22, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> On 27/07/2026 1:31 pm, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>>> On 7/27/26 11:54, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>>> The memory-failure tests call cleanup() only after all result checks.
>>>> A failed ASSERT_* invokes fixture teardown and aborts the test, so it
>>>> skips cleanup() and leaves the injected page hardware-poisoned.
>>>>
>>>> Invoke cleanup() from FIXTURE_TEARDOWN() instead. Guard it with
>>>> self->triggered so tests that exit before injection do not try to
>>>> unpoison a page when no injection was attempted. This runs the existing
>>>> HWPoison and HardwareCorrupted checks on both normal and assertion-failure
>>>> paths.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: ff4ef2fbd101 ("selftests/mm: add memory failure anonymous page test")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c | 26 +++++++++------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c
>>>> index 5d00aab31f9b5..eaa8b9bd401a1 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c
>>>> @@ -122,13 +122,6 @@ static void teardown_sighandler(void)
>>>> sigaction(SIGBUS, &sa, NULL);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> -FIXTURE_TEARDOWN(memory_failure)
>>>> -{
>>>> - close(self->kpageflags_fd);
>>>> - close(self->pagemap_fd);
>>>> - teardown_sighandler();
>>>> -}
>>>> -
>>>> static void prepare(struct __test_metadata *_metadata, FIXTURE_DATA(memory_failure) * self,
>>>> void *vaddr)
>>>> {
>>>> @@ -200,8 +193,7 @@ static void check(struct __test_metadata *_metadata, FIXTURE_DATA(memory_failure
>>>> ASSERT_EQ(pfn_flags & KPF_HWPOISON, KPF_HWPOISON);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> -static void cleanup(struct __test_metadata *_metadata, FIXTURE_DATA(memory_failure) * self,
>>>> - void *vaddr)
>>>> +static void cleanup(struct __test_metadata *_metadata, FIXTURE_DATA(memory_failure) * self)
>>>> {
>>>> unsigned long size;
>>>> uint64_t pfn_flags;
>>>> @@ -217,6 +209,16 @@ static void cleanup(struct __test_metadata *_metadata, FIXTURE_DATA(memory_failu
>>>> ASSERT_EQ(size, self->corrupted_size);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +FIXTURE_TEARDOWN(memory_failure)
>>>> +{
>>>> + if (self->triggered)
>>>> + cleanup(_metadata, self);
>>>
>>> If the variant->inject(self, addr) fails, self->triggered would already have
>>> been set.
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to have a new self->poisoned that we set only after
>>> ->inject succeeded?
>> Setting self->poisoned after variant->inject() returns would not cover the
>> MADV_HARD signal path.
>>
>> The call path of madvise(MADV_HWPOISON) is:
>>
>> madvise() -> madvise_do_behavior() -> madvise_inject_error(MF_ACTION_REQUIRED) ->
>> memory_failure() -> hwpoison_user_mappings() -> kill_procs(BUS_MCEERR_AR) ->
>> kill_proc() -> force_sig_mceerr()
>>
>> SIGBUS is therefore queued while the madvise system call is executing and
>> delivered on return to userspace, before execution can continue after
>> variant->inject().
>>
>> The test's sigbus_action() then calls siglongjmp(), so an assignment placed
>> after variant->inject() would be bypassed. The flag would remain false and
>> the test would attempt the injection again after returning to sigsetjmp().
>>
>> Also, memory_failure() sets PG_hwpoison before several recovery paths that
>> can return an error, so a failed injection return does not prove that the
>> page was not poisoned.
>>
>> Maybe renaming triggered to injection_attempted is more precise here.
>
> Yes, that would make it clearer. + adding a comment that we want to cleanup even
> when injection was attempted, but failed.
self->triggered indicates whether the memory failure injection has been performed,
and it has the same meaning as injection_attempted. However, injection_attempted is
indeed clearer. So this change makes sense to me.
Thanks both.
.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-29 3:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-27 9:54 Muhammad Usama Anjum
2026-07-27 12:31 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-28 14:22 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2026-07-28 19:06 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-29 3:38 ` Miaohe Lin [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=067fdf0f-7322-c011-0f2a-882dc63f0964@huawei.com \
--to=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=nao.horiguchi@gmail.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=usama.anjum@arm.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®