From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org
Cc: anshuman.khandual@arm.com, quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com,
kevin.brodsky@arm.com, yangyicong@hisilicon.com,
joey.gouly@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, david@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: Enable vmalloc-huge with ptdump
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 20:00:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e10d0c8f-c86b-4e26-8006-f38734993796@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250610160048.11254-1-dev.jain@arm.com>
On 10/06/2025 17:00, Dev Jain wrote:
> arm64 disables vmalloc-huge when kernel page table dumping is enabled,
> because an intermediate table may be removed, potentially causing the
> ptdump code to dereference an invalid address. We want to be able to
> analyze block vs page mappings for kernel mappings with ptdump, so to
> enable vmalloc-huge with ptdump, synchronize between page table removal in
> pmd_free_pte_page()/pud_free_pmd_page() and ptdump pagetable walking. We
> use mmap_read_lock and not write lock because we don't need to synchronize
> between two different vm_structs; two vmalloc objects running this same
> code path will point to different page tables, hence there is no race.
>
> For pud_free_pmd_page(), we isolate the PMD table to avoid taking the lock
> 512 times again via pmd_free_pte_page(). Note that there is no need to
> move __flush_tlb_kernel_pgtable() to immediately after pud_clear(); the
> only argument against this would be that we immediately require a
> dsb(ishst) (present in __flush_tlb_kernel_pgtable()) after pud_clear(),
> but that is not the case, since the transition is from
> valid -> invalid, not vice-versa.
>
> No issues were observed with mm-selftests. No issues were observed while
> parallelly running test_vmalloc.sh and dumping the kernel pagetable through
> sysfs in a loop.
>
> v1->v2:
> - Take lock only when CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS is on
I thought we agreed that we would use a static key and some rcu synchronize
magic? What was the reason for taking this approach?
I'm guessing CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS is very much a debug feature that we wouldn't
expect to enable in production kernels; if that's the case, then perhaps this
approach is good enough. But given Will suggested a solution that would make it
zero overhead when ptdump is not active, why not just take that approach?
Thanks,
Ryan
> - In case of pud_free_pmd_page(), isolate the PMD table to avoid taking
> the lock 512 times again via pmd_free_pte_page()
>
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/vmalloc.h | 6 ++---
> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/vmalloc.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/vmalloc.h
> index 12f534e8f3ed..e835fd437ae0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/vmalloc.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/vmalloc.h
> @@ -12,15 +12,13 @@ static inline bool arch_vmap_pud_supported(pgprot_t prot)
> /*
> * SW table walks can't handle removal of intermediate entries.
> */
> - return pud_sect_supported() &&
> - !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS);
> + return pud_sect_supported();
> }
>
> #define arch_vmap_pmd_supported arch_vmap_pmd_supported
> static inline bool arch_vmap_pmd_supported(pgprot_t prot)
> {
> - /* See arch_vmap_pud_supported() */
> - return !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS);
> + return true;
> }
>
> #define arch_vmap_pte_range_map_size arch_vmap_pte_range_map_size
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> index 8fcf59ba39db..fa98a62e4baf 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> @@ -1267,7 +1267,25 @@ int pmd_clear_huge(pmd_t *pmdp)
> return 1;
> }
>
> -int pmd_free_pte_page(pmd_t *pmdp, unsigned long addr)
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS
> +static inline void ptdump_synchronize_lock(void)
> +{
> + /* Synchronize against ptdump_walk_pgd() */
> + mmap_read_lock(&init_mm);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void ptdump_synchronize_unlock(void)
> +{
> + mmap_read_unlock(&init_mm);
> +}
> +#else /* CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS */
> +
> +static inline void ptdump_synchronize_lock(void) {}
> +static inline void ptdump_synchronize_unlock(void) {}
> +
> +#endif /* CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS */
> +
> +static int __pmd_free_pte_page(pmd_t *pmdp, unsigned long addr, bool lock)
> {
> pte_t *table;
> pmd_t pmd;
> @@ -1280,12 +1298,23 @@ int pmd_free_pte_page(pmd_t *pmdp, unsigned long addr)
> }
>
> table = pte_offset_kernel(pmdp, addr);
> +
> + if (lock)
> + ptdump_synchronize_lock();
> pmd_clear(pmdp);
> + if (lock)
> + ptdump_synchronize_unlock();
> +
> __flush_tlb_kernel_pgtable(addr);
> pte_free_kernel(NULL, table);
> return 1;
> }
>
> +int pmd_free_pte_page(pmd_t *pmdp, unsigned long addr)
> +{
> + return __pmd_free_pte_page(pmdp, addr, true);
> +}
> +
> int pud_free_pmd_page(pud_t *pudp, unsigned long addr)
> {
> pmd_t *table;
> @@ -1301,14 +1330,22 @@ int pud_free_pmd_page(pud_t *pudp, unsigned long addr)
> }
>
> table = pmd_offset(pudp, addr);
> +
> + /*
> + * Isolate the PMD table; in case of race with ptdump, this helps
> + * us to avoid taking the lock in __pmd_free_pte_page()
> + */
> + ptdump_synchronize_lock();
> + pud_clear(pudp);
> + ptdump_synchronize_unlock();
> +
> pmdp = table;
> next = addr;
> end = addr + PUD_SIZE;
> do {
> - pmd_free_pte_page(pmdp, next);
> + __pmd_free_pte_page(pmdp, next, false);
> } while (pmdp++, next += PMD_SIZE, next != end);
>
> - pud_clear(pudp);
> __flush_tlb_kernel_pgtable(addr);
> pmd_free(NULL, table);
> return 1;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-10 19:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-10 16:00 Dev Jain
2025-06-10 19:00 ` Ryan Roberts [this message]
2025-06-11 3:02 ` Dev Jain
2025-06-11 9:30 ` Will Deacon
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=e10d0c8f-c86b-4e26-8006-f38734993796@arm.com \
--to=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.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®