From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, maz@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, steven.price@arm.com,
aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, oupton@kernel.org, gshan@redhat.com,
joey.gouly@arm.com, tabba@google.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com,
linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, gankulkarni@os.amperecomputing.com,
sdonthineni@nvidia.com, alpergun@google.com,
fj0570is@fujitsu.com, WeiLin.Chang@arm.com,
lpieralisi@kernel.org, enju.kohei@fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18] arm64: mm: Handle Granule Protection Faults (GPFs)
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 11:30:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aruTTJiIheHigPSJ@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3934b4c9-6b1f-44fa-847e-4fb1e67a58e7@arm.com>
On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 11:38:01AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 25/09/2026 18:07, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 05:04:06PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > On 23/09/2026 16:45, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 12:06:15PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 06:15:34PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > > > On Sun, Sep 13, 2026 at 08:04:58AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > > > > From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If the host attempts to access granules that have been delegated for use
> > > > > > > in a realm these accesses will be caught and will trigger a Granule
> > > > > > > Protection Fault (GPF).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A fault during a page walk signals a bug in the kernel and is handled by
> > > > > > > oopsing the kernel. A non-page walk fault could be caused by user space
> > > > > > > having access to a page which has been delegated to the kernel and will
> > > > > > > trigger a SIGBUS to allow debugging why user space is trying to access a
> > > > > > > delegated page.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There is work in progress to unmap the guest_memfd backed private pages from the
> > > > > > > linear map. Until we get that support, we could get spurious GPFs from within
> > > > > > > the kernel, e.g., load_unaligned_zeropad(). So, try to fix them up for now.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > Changes since v17:
> > > > > > > * Pass untagged address to die_kernel_fault() - Sashiko
> > > > > > > * Explicitly check !user_mode() for fixups - Catalin
> > > > > > > * Switch to BUS_OBJERR for si_code from SI_KERNEL - Catalin
> > > > > > > * Clarify the commit description about the upcoming work on
> > > > > > > unmapping guest_memfd backed pages from linear map
> > > > > > > Changes since v16:
> > > > > > > * Update the commit description to indicate why we try to fixup GPFs
> > > > > > > Changes since v10:
> > > > > > > * Don't call arm64_notify_die() in do_gpf() but simply return 1.
> > > > > > > Changes since v2:
> > > > > > > * Include missing "Granule Protection Fault at level -1"
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > > > > > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I still don't think we should do this, given that the plan is to unmap
> > > > > > the memory from the linear map. If this thing fires, it's a kernel bug
> > > > > > and it should be fatal.
> > > > >
> > > > > If the linear unmapping gets merged first, I agree, no need to handle
> > > > > these faults. I haven't followed that series, so no idea where it is at.
> > >
> > > There doesn't seem to be much progress on that series. Brendan
> > > volunteered to resurrect the series, taking over from Nikita [0].
> > > But looks like Brendan is not working on this anymore. Will see
> > > if someone is really planning to look at it.
> > >
> > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DJJ35VLH2PE5.DFD8OYXEOH97@linux.dev
> >
> > I just realised that this only solves part of the problem. Normal kernel
> > allocations are delegated RMM metadata and they'll also trigger GPF
>
> Other than Kdump, kernel shouldn't try to touch these metadata pages
> unless there is a kernel bug ?
Hibernate but we need to reject this as well since there's no way you
can save and restore the realm memory.
> And the userspace wouldn't have a mapping for them anyways ?
That's the aim but proposed KVM/CCA support still allows non-gmem slots
to end up delegated (I haven't checked the latest if addressed).
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/a11aba04-eaaa-43fd-988b-a2581b1b2fdb@arm.com/
> >
> > I think rmi_delegate_range() covers the non-kdump cases, both for
> > metadata and realm memory, we could unmap the linear map there (map it
> > back in rmi_undelegate_range()).
>
> We could explore that option for the kernel allocations too.
I do wonder what we gain from unmapping. If architecturally we get a
synchronous fault when accessing delegated pages, it's only marginally
more code to do_gpf() (and we might need this function anyway for
kdump) and we avoid linear map fragmentation. So, I think we just need
to agree what's fatal and what can safely recover. We do need Alper's
patch for kdump, otherwise we can't fix it up in do_gpf().
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-29 10:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-13 7:04 Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-16 16:39 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-16 16:56 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-17 7:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-17 9:03 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-17 10:36 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-22 8:16 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-22 13:21 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-22 14:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-22 15:14 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-28 11:01 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-29 10:40 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-29 10:47 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-22 17:15 ` Will Deacon
2026-09-23 11:06 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-23 15:45 ` Will Deacon
2026-09-23 16:04 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-24 15:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-25 17:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-09-28 10:38 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-09-29 10:30 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2026-09-29 10:42 ` Suzuki K Poulose
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=aruTTJiIheHigPSJ@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=WeiLin.Chang@arm.com \
--cc=alpergun@google.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=enju.kohei@fujitsu.com \
--cc=fj0570is@fujitsu.com \
--cc=gankulkarni@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=sdonthineni@nvidia.com \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/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®