On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 11:24 PM David Hildenbrand david@redhat.com wrote:
On 20.02.25 10:21, Barry Song wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 9:40 PM David Hildenbrand david@redhat.com wrote:
On 19.02.25 19:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:30 AM David Hildenbrand david@redhat.com wrote:
On 19.02.25 19:26, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 3:25 AM Barry Song 21cnbao@gmail.com wrote: > > From: Barry Song v-songbaohua@oppo.com > > userfaultfd_move() checks whether the PTE entry is present or a > swap entry. > > - If the PTE entry is present, move_present_pte() handles folio > migration by setting: > > src_folio->index = linear_page_index(dst_vma, dst_addr); > > - If the PTE entry is a swap entry, move_swap_pte() simply copies > the PTE to the new dst_addr. > > This approach is incorrect because even if the PTE is a swap > entry, it can still reference a folio that remains in the swap > cache. > > If do_swap_page() is triggered, it may locate the folio in the > swap cache. However, during add_rmap operations, a kernel panic > can occur due to: > page_pgoff(folio, page) != linear_page_index(vma, address)
Thanks for the report and reproducer!
> > $./a.out > /dev/null > [ 13.336953] page: refcount:6 mapcount:1 mapping:00000000f43db19c index:0xffffaf150 pfn:0x4667c > [ 13.337520] head: order:2 mapcount:1 entire_mapcount:0 nr_pages_mapped:1 pincount:0 > [ 13.337716] memcg:ffff00000405f000 > [ 13.337849] anon flags: 0x3fffc0000020459(locked|uptodate|dirty|owner_priv_1|head|swapbacked|node=0|zone=0|lastcpupid=0xffff) > [ 13.338630] raw: 03fffc0000020459 ffff80008507b538 ffff80008507b538 ffff000006260361 > [ 13.338831] raw: 0000000ffffaf150 0000000000004000 0000000600000000 ffff00000405f000 > [ 13.339031] head: 03fffc0000020459 ffff80008507b538 ffff80008507b538 ffff000006260361 > [ 13.339204] head: 0000000ffffaf150 0000000000004000 0000000600000000 ffff00000405f000 > [ 13.339375] head: 03fffc0000000202 fffffdffc0199f01 ffffffff00000000 0000000000000001 > [ 13.339546] head: 0000000000000004 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000 > [ 13.339736] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(page_pgoff(folio, page) != linear_page_index(vma, address)) > [ 13.340190] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 13.340316] kernel BUG at mm/rmap.c:1380! > [ 13.340683] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 00000000f2000800 [#1] PREEMPT SMP > [ 13.340969] Modules linked in: > [ 13.341257] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 107 Comm: a.out Not tainted 6.14.0-rc3-gcf42737e247a-dirty #299 > [ 13.341470] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) > [ 13.341671] pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) > [ 13.341815] pc : __page_check_anon_rmap+0xa0/0xb0 > [ 13.341920] lr : __page_check_anon_rmap+0xa0/0xb0 > [ 13.342018] sp : ffff80008752bb20 > [ 13.342093] x29: ffff80008752bb20 x28: fffffdffc0199f00 x27: 0000000000000001 > [ 13.342404] x26: 0000000000000000 x25: 0000000000000001 x24: 0000000000000001 > [ 13.342575] x23: 0000ffffaf0d0000 x22: 0000ffffaf0d0000 x21: fffffdffc0199f00 > [ 13.342731] x20: fffffdffc0199f00 x19: ffff000006210700 x18: 00000000ffffffff > [ 13.342881] x17: 6c203d2120296567 x16: 6170202c6f696c6f x15: 662866666f67705f > [ 13.343033] x14: 6567617028454741 x13: 2929737365726464 x12: ffff800083728ab0 > [ 13.343183] x11: ffff800082996bf8 x10: 0000000000000fd7 x9 : ffff80008011bc40 > [ 13.343351] x8 : 0000000000017fe8 x7 : 00000000fffff000 x6 : ffff8000829eebf8 > [ 13.343498] x5 : c0000000fffff000 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 0000000000000000 > [ 13.343645] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : ffff0000062db980 x0 : 000000000000005f > [ 13.343876] Call trace: > [ 13.344045] __page_check_anon_rmap+0xa0/0xb0 (P) > [ 13.344234] folio_add_anon_rmap_ptes+0x22c/0x320 > [ 13.344333] do_swap_page+0x1060/0x1400 > [ 13.344417] __handle_mm_fault+0x61c/0xbc8 > [ 13.344504] handle_mm_fault+0xd8/0x2e8 > [ 13.344586] do_page_fault+0x20c/0x770 > [ 13.344673] do_translation_fault+0xb4/0xf0 > [ 13.344759] do_mem_abort+0x48/0xa0 > [ 13.344842] el0_da+0x58/0x130 > [ 13.344914] el0t_64_sync_handler+0xc4/0x138 > [ 13.345002] el0t_64_sync+0x1ac/0x1b0 > [ 13.345208] Code: aa1503e0 f000f801 910f6021 97ff5779 (d4210000) > [ 13.345504] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- > [ 13.345715] note: a.out[107] exited with irqs disabled > [ 13.345954] note: a.out[107] exited with preempt_count 2 > > Fully fixing it would be quite complex, requiring similar handling > of folios as done in move_present_pte.
How complex would that be? Is it a matter of adding folio_maybe_dma_pinned() checks, doing folio_move_anon_rmap() and folio->index = linear_page_index like in move_present_pte() or something more?
If the entry is pte_swp_exclusive(), and the folio is order-0, it cannot be pinned and we may be able to move it I think.
So all that's required is to check pte_swp_exclusive() and the folio size.
... in theory :) Not sure about the swap details.
Looking some more into it, I think we would have to perform all the folio and anon_vma locking and pinning that we do for present pages in move_pages_pte(). If that's correct then maybe treating swapcache pages like a present page inside move_pages_pte() would be simpler?
I'd be more in favor of not doing that. Maybe there are parts we can move out into helper functions instead, so we can reuse them?
I actually have a v2 ready. Maybe we can discuss if some of the code can be extracted as a helper based on the below before I send it formally?
I’d say there are many parts that can be shared with present PTE, but there are two major differences:
- Page exclusivity – swapcache doesn’t require it (try_to_unmap_one has remove
Exclusive flag;) 2. src_anon_vma and its lock – swapcache doesn’t require it（folio is not mapped）
That's a lot of complicated code you have there (not your fault, it's complicated stuff ... ) :)
Some of it might be compressed/simplified by the use of "else if".
I'll try to take a closer look later (will have to apply it to see the context better). Just one independent comment because I stumbled over this recently:
[...]
@@ -1062,10 +1063,13 @@ static int move_present_pte(struct mm_struct *mm, folio_move_anon_rmap(src_folio, dst_vma); src_folio->index = linear_page_index(dst_vma, dst_addr);
orig_dst_pte = mk_pte(&src_folio->page, dst_vma->vm_page_prot);/* Follow mremap() behavior and treat the entry dirty after the move */orig_dst_pte = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(orig_dst_pte), dst_vma);
if (pte_present(orig_src_pte)) {orig_dst_pte = mk_pte(&src_folio->page, dst_vma->vm_page_prot);/* Follow mremap() behavior and treat the entry dirty after the move */orig_dst_pte = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(orig_dst_pte), dst_vma);I'll note that the comment and mkdirty is misleading/wrong. It's softdirty that we care about only. But that is something independent of this change.
For swp PTEs, we maybe also would want to set softdirty.
See move_soft_dirty_pte() on what is actually done on the mremap path.
I actually don't quite understand the changelog in commit 0f8975ec4db2 (" mm: soft-dirty bits for user memory changes tracking").
" Another thing to note, is that when mremap moves PTEs they are marked with soft-dirty as well, since from the user perspective mremap modifies the virtual memory at mremap's new address."
Why is the hardware-dirty bit not relevant? From the user's perspective, the memory at the destination virtual address of mremap/userfaultfd_move has changed.
For systems where CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SOFT_DIRTY is false, how can the dirty status be determined?
Or is the answer that we only care about soft-dirty changes?
For the hardware-dirty bit, do we only care about actual modifications to the physical page content rather than changes at the virtual address level?
-- Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Thanks Barry