| Message ID | 1504770316-4327-2-git-send-email-xiexiuqi@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 03:45:14PM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote: > With ARM v8.2 RAS Extension, SEA are usually triggered when memory errors > are consumed. In some cases, if the error address is in a clean page or a > read-only page, there is a chance to recover. Such as error occurs in a > instruction page, we can reread this page from disk instead of killing > process. > > Because memory_failure() may sleep, we can not call it directly in SEA > exception context. So we saved faulting physical address associated with > a process in the ghes handler and set __TIF_SEA_NOTIFY. When we return > from SEA exception context and get into do_notify_resume() before the > process running, we could check it and call memory_failure() to do > recovery. It's safe, because we are in process context. > > Signed-off-by: Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Wang Xiongfeng <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com> This is not a correct SOB chain, please check: Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst, section 11. > --- > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 11 +++ > arch/arm64/include/asm/ras.h | 36 +++++++++ > arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 4 +- > arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile | 1 + > arch/arm64/kernel/ras.c | 141 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c | 8 ++ > arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 27 +++++-- > drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 4 +- > 8 files changed, 221 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/ras.h > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kernel/ras.c What tree are those patches against? They don't apply cleanly against latest mainline: checking file arch/arm64/Kconfig Hunk #1 succeeded at 641 (offset 1 line). checking file arch/arm64/include/asm/ras.h checking file arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h Hunk #1 FAILED at 86. Hunk #2 succeeded at 98 (offset -4 lines). Hunk #3 FAILED at 112. 2 out of 3 hunks FAILED checking file arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile checking file arch/arm64/kernel/ras.c checking file arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 40 with fuzz 1 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #2 FAILED at 750. 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED checking file arch/arm64/mm/fault.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 631 (offset 37 lines). checking file drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
Hi Xie XiuQi, (Sorry a few versions of this went past before I caught up with it) On 07/09/17 08:45, Xie XiuQi wrote: > With ARM v8.2 RAS Extension, SEA are usually triggered when memory errors > are consumed. In some cases, if the error address is in a clean page or a > read-only page, there is a chance to recover. Such as error occurs in a > instruction page, we can reread this page from disk instead of killing > process. > Because memory_failure() may sleep, we can not call it directly in SEA > exception context. This is why we have memory_failure_queue() instead, it ... bother. That doesn't look nmi-safe. (I thought this ended with an llist, but clearly I was looking at the wrong thing). It doesn't look like this is a problem for NOTIFY_SEA as it would only interrupt itself on the same CPU if the memory-failure code/data were corrupt. (which is not a case we can handle). We need to fix this before any of the asynchronous NMI-like RAS notifications for arm64 get merged. (this is one problem, but I don't think its 'the' problem you are trying to solve with this series). > So we saved faulting physical address associated with > a process in the ghes handler and set __TIF_SEA_NOTIFY. A per-notification type TIF flag looks fishy, surely this would affect all NMI-like RAS notification methods? > When we return > from SEA exception context and get into do_notify_resume() before the > process running, we could check it and call memory_failure() to do > recovery. It's safe, because we are in process context. I'm afraid I don't think this is the best approach for fixing this. Its tied to the notification type, but the notification should be irrelevant once we call ghes_proc(). It adds code poking around in CPER and ACPI/GHES to the arm64 arch code, all of this should be in the core common code. Most importantly: this means arm64 behaves differently with regard to handling memory errors to other architectures using ACPI. Two behaviours means twice the code, review and bugs... Delaying the handling until we re-enter user-space means faults that may affect the kernel aren't handled until much later. Just because the fault was synchronous and user-space was running doesn't mean only user space is affected. Some examples I've collected so far: the zero-page may be corrupt, this is mapped into every process and used by the kernel. Similarly corruption in the vdso affects all user-space. The fault may affect the page tables, this affects all users of the mm_struct. (I'm sure we agree that an synchronous-external-abort interrupting the kernel is fatal for the kernel, but the other way round isn't always true). Setting a TIF flag to handle the error before re-entering user-space is a problem as the scheduler may choose to pre-empt this task and run all the other tasks before this eventually gets handled. Assuming this is just a problem with memory_failure_queue(), two alternatives I can suggest are making memory_failure_queue() nmi-safe, or abstracting NOTIFY_NMI's estatus pool/cache to use for the arm64 NMI-like notifications too. If there is more to this, can you explain the problem you're trying to solve? (I suspect there may be an issue with multiple-signals being merged, or exactly when memory_failure_queue()'s work gets run.) Can you outline the sequence of events? You're picking a physical address out of 'ARM Processor Error Information Structure', these correspond with Cache, TLB, Bus or (the mysterious) 'micro architectural error'. I don't see anything checking the error type. Given the physical address, are you adding error-handling for cache-errors with this series? Thanks, James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi James, Thanks for your comments. On 2017/9/9 2:15, James Morse wrote: > Hi Xie XiuQi, > > (Sorry a few versions of this went past before I caught up with it) > > On 07/09/17 08:45, Xie XiuQi wrote: >> With ARM v8.2 RAS Extension, SEA are usually triggered when memory errors >> are consumed. In some cases, if the error address is in a clean page or a >> read-only page, there is a chance to recover. Such as error occurs in a >> instruction page, we can reread this page from disk instead of killing >> process. > >> Because memory_failure() may sleep, we can not call it directly in SEA >> exception context. > > This is why we have memory_failure_queue() instead, it ... bother. That doesn't > look nmi-safe. (I thought this ended with an llist, but clearly I was looking at > the wrong thing). > > It doesn't look like this is a problem for NOTIFY_SEA as it would only interrupt > itself on the same CPU if the memory-failure code/data were corrupt. (which is > not a case we can handle). We need to fix this before any of the asynchronous > NMI-like RAS notifications for arm64 get merged. > > (this is one problem, but I don't think its 'the' problem you are trying to > solve with this series). > > >> So we saved faulting physical address associated with >> a process in the ghes handler and set __TIF_SEA_NOTIFY. > > A per-notification type TIF flag looks fishy, surely this would affect all > NMI-like RAS notification methods? > > >> When we return >> from SEA exception context and get into do_notify_resume() before the >> process running, we could check it and call memory_failure() to do >> recovery. It's safe, because we are in process context. > > I'm afraid I don't think this is the best approach for fixing this. > Its tied to the notification type, but the notification should be irrelevant > once we call ghes_proc(). > It adds code poking around in CPER and ACPI/GHES to the arm64 arch code, all of > this should be in the core common code. > Most importantly: this means arm64 behaves differently with regard to handling > memory errors to other architectures using ACPI. Two behaviours means twice the > code, review and bugs... I think we can use arch_apei_report_mem_error() to report memory error, just like what is implemented in x86. We can record the memory address in somewhere else, namely report the error. Then the SEA handler can use the memory error reported. > > > Delaying the handling until we re-enter user-space means faults that may affect > the kernel aren't handled until much later. Just because the fault was > synchronous and user-space was running doesn't mean only user space is affected. > Some examples I've collected so far: the zero-page may be corrupt, this is > mapped into every process and used by the kernel. Similarly corruption in the > vdso affects all user-space. The fault may affect the page tables, this affects > all users of the mm_struct. I am not sure if memory_failure can recognize the zero page as a kernel page and just panic. If several processes share a same page, I think we don't have to kill the process until it access the address containing the errors. If the process access the error address, a SEA will occur again, then we can handle it. If the process will never access the error address, such as a syscall in vdso the process won't use, we don't have to kill the process. For vdso case, we havn't repaired the error. It will affect newly created processes. I don't figure out how to handle this. Is it a kernel page mapped into user space or memory_failure will just panic when handling this page. > > (I'm sure we agree that an synchronous-external-abort interrupting the kernel is > fatal for the kernel, but the other way round isn't always true). > > Setting a TIF flag to handle the error before re-entering user-space is a > problem as the scheduler may choose to pre-empt this task and run all the other > tasks before this eventually gets handled. > > > Assuming this is just a problem with memory_failure_queue(), two alternatives I > can suggest are making memory_failure_queue() nmi-safe, Yes, I agree, but it may be hard to be achieved. or abstracting > NOTIFY_NMI's estatus pool/cache to use for the arm64 NMI-like notifications too. > > If there is more to this, can you explain the problem you're trying to solve? > (I suspect there may be an issue with multiple-signals being merged, or exactly > when memory_failure_queue()'s work gets run.) Can you outline the sequence of > events? > > > You're picking a physical address out of 'ARM Processor Error Information > Structure', these correspond with Cache, TLB, Bus or (the mysterious) 'micro > architectural error'. I don't see anything checking the error type. > Given the physical address, are you adding error-handling for cache-errors with > this series? > > > Thanks, > > James > > > . > Thanks, Xiongfeng Wang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi James,
Thank you very much for your carefully review.
I first describe the approach of this patchset:
A memory access error on the execution path usually triggers SEA.
According to the existing process, errors occurred in the kernel,
leading to direct panic, if it occurred the user-space, we should
just kill process.
But there is a class of error, in fact, is not necessary to kill
process, you can recover and continue to run the process. Such as
the instruction data corrupted, where the memory page might be
read-only, which is has not been modified, the disk might have the
correct data, so you can directly drop the page, ant reload it when
necessary.
So this patchset is just try to solve such problem: if the error is
consumed in user-space and the error occurs on a clean page, you can
directly drop the memory page without killing process.
This is implemented in memory_failure, which is generic process.
memory_failure
-> hwpoison_user_mappings
/*
* Propagate the dirty bit from PTEs to struct page first, because we
* need this to decide if we should kill or just drop the page.
* XXX: the dirty test could be racy: set_page_dirty() may not always
* be called inside page lock (it's recommended but not enforced).
*/
mapping = page_mapping(hpage);
if (!(flags & MF_MUST_KILL) && !PageDirty(hpage) && mapping &&
mapping_cap_writeback_dirty(mapping)) {
if (page_mkclean(hpage)) {
SetPageDirty(hpage);
} else {
kill = 0;
ttu |= TTU_IGNORE_HWPOISON;
pr_info("Memory failure: %#lx: corrupted page was clean: dropped without side effects\n",
pfn);
}
}
The error reported by SEA should be handled before re-enter the process,
or we must kill the process to prevent error propagation.
memory_failure_queue() is asynchronous, in which, error info was saved
at ghes_proc, but handled in kworker. During this period there is a context
switching, so we can not determine which process would be switch to. So
memory_failure_queue is not suitable for handling the problem.
And memory_failure is not nmi-safe, so it can not be called directly in the
SEA context. So we just handle this error at SEA exit path, and before context
switching.
In FFH mode, physical address can only be obtained by parsing the GHES table.
But we only care about SEA, so the error handling is tied to the type of notification.
The TIF flag is checked on a generic path, but it will only be set when SEA occurs.
And if we use unlikely optimization, it should have little impact on performance.
And the TIF flag approach was used on x86 platform for years, until commit d4812e169d
(x86, mce: Get rid of TIF_MCE_NOTIFY and associated mce tricks)[0]. On currently arm64
platform, there is no IST interrupt[1] function, so we could not call memory_failure
directly in SEA context. So the way to use TIF notification, is also a good choice,
after all, the same way on x86 platform is verified.
Any comment is welcome, thanks.
[0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5571021/
[1] [PATCH v4 0/5] x86: Rework IST interrupts https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/21/632
On 2017/9/9 2:15, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Xie XiuQi,
>
> (Sorry a few versions of this went past before I caught up with it)
>
> On 07/09/17 08:45, Xie XiuQi wrote:
>> With ARM v8.2 RAS Extension, SEA are usually triggered when memory errors
>> are consumed. In some cases, if the error address is in a clean page or a
>> read-only page, there is a chance to recover. Such as error occurs in a
>> instruction page, we can reread this page from disk instead of killing
>> process.
>
>> Because memory_failure() may sleep, we can not call it directly in SEA
>> exception context.
>
> This is why we have memory_failure_queue() instead, it ... bother. That doesn't
> look nmi-safe. (I thought this ended with an llist, but clearly I was looking at
> the wrong thing).
>
> It doesn't look like this is a problem for NOTIFY_SEA as it would only interrupt
> itself on the same CPU if the memory-failure code/data were corrupt. (which is
> not a case we can handle). We need to fix this before any of the asynchronous
> NMI-like RAS notifications for arm64 get merged.
>
> (this is one problem, but I don't think its 'the' problem you are trying to
> solve with this series).
>
>
>> So we saved faulting physical address associated with
>> a process in the ghes handler and set __TIF_SEA_NOTIFY.
>
> A per-notification type TIF flag looks fishy, surely this would affect all
> NMI-like RAS notification methods?
>
>
>> When we return
>> from SEA exception context and get into do_notify_resume() before the
>> process running, we could check it and call memory_failure() to do
>> recovery. It's safe, because we are in process context.
>
> I'm afraid I don't think this is the best approach for fixing this.
> Its tied to the notification type, but the notification should be irrelevant
> once we call ghes_proc().
> It adds code poking around in CPER and ACPI/GHES to the arm64 arch code, all of
> this should be in the core common code.
> Most importantly: this means arm64 behaves differently with regard to handling
> memory errors to other architectures using ACPI. Two behaviours means twice the
> code, review and bugs...
Yes, I agree.
I try to avoid the introduction of architecture-related code in CPER and ACPI / GHES,
but CPER_SEC_PROC_ARM is ARM specific, so if you want to do some recovery action,
it will inevitably call the ARM-related function interface. I'll try to optimize it,
and try to reduce the arch specific code introduction.
>
>
> Delaying the handling until we re-enter user-space means faults that may affect
> the kernel aren't handled until much later. Just because the fault was
> synchronous and user-space was running doesn't mean only user space is affected.
> Some examples I've collected so far: the zero-page may be corrupt, this is
> mapped into every process and used by the kernel. Similarly corruption in the
> vdso affects all user-space. The fault may affect the page tables, this affects
> all users of the mm_struct.
In fact, compared to the current processing, we did not delay for a long time.
1) For kernel-space errors, TIF flag is ignored, die() is called directly.
2) For user-space errors, the current processing is to send SIGBUS directly.
In this patchset, the memory_failure() is inserted before do_signal().
And for error itself, memory_failure() could detect the page type and do appropriate action.
>
> (I'm sure we agree that an synchronous-external-abort interrupting the kernel is
> fatal for the kernel, but the other way round isn't always true).
>
> Setting a TIF flag to handle the error before re-entering user-space is a
> problem as the scheduler may choose to pre-empt this task and run all the other
> tasks before this eventually gets handled.
>
>
> Assuming this is just a problem with memory_failure_queue(), two alternatives I
> can suggest are making memory_failure_queue() nmi-safe, or abstracting
> NOTIFY_NMI's estatus pool/cache to use for the arm64 NMI-like notifications too.
>
> If there is more to this, can you explain the problem you're trying to solve?
> (I suspect there may be an issue with multiple-signals being merged, or exactly
> when memory_failure_queue()'s work gets run.) Can you outline the sequence of
> events?
>
>
> You're picking a physical address out of 'ARM Processor Error Information
> Structure', these correspond with Cache, TLB, Bus or (the mysterious) 'micro
> architectural error'. I don't see anything checking the error type.
> Given the physical address, are you adding error-handling for cache-errors with
> this series?
Yes, we only care about cache-errors. So we could just pick physical address
for cache errors.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
>
>
> .
>
Hi James, I try to explain some of following questions. On 2017/9/16 2:33, James Morse wrote: > Hi Xie XiuQi, > > On 11/09/17 15:11, Xie XiuQi wrote: >> I first describe the approach of this patchset: >> >> A memory access error on the execution path usually triggers SEA. >> According to the existing process, errors occurred in the kernel, >> leading to direct panic, if it occurred the user-space, we should >> just kill process. >> >> But there is a class of error, in fact, is not necessary to kill >> process, you can recover and continue to run the process. Such as >> the instruction data corrupted, where the memory page might be >> read-only, which is has not been modified, the disk might have the >> correct data, so you can directly drop the page, ant reload it when >> necessary. >> >> So this patchset is just try to solve such problem: if the error is >> consumed in user-space and the error occurs on a clean page, you can >> directly drop the memory page without killing process. >> >> This is implemented in memory_failure, which is generic process. > >> The error reported by SEA should be handled before re-enter the process, >> or we must kill the process to prevent error propagation. >> >> memory_failure_queue() is asynchronous, in which, error info was saved >> at ghes_proc, but handled in kworker. During this period there is a context >> switching, so we can not determine which process would be switch to. So >> memory_failure_queue is not suitable for handling the problem. > > Thanks for this summary. I see the problem you're trying to solve is when > memory_failure() runs, in your scenario its not guaranteed to run before we > return to user space. > > What is the user-visible symptom of this? SIGBUS, code=0 instead of SIGBUS, > code=...MCEERR_A? If the corrupted page is clean, just dropped it and return to user-space without side effects. And if corrupted page is dirty, memory_failure() will send SIGBUS with code=BUS_MCEERR_AR. > > ..in which case I'm looking at this as a race with the memory_failure() bottom > half via schedule_work(). Do you mean there is a race between memory_failure() from do_notify_resume() and from schedule_work()? Indeed there a race here, thank you for pointing out that. Actually, memory_failure_queue() is not needed in SEA case if we process it in synchronous. I'll try to solve this issue later. > > How does x86 avoid this same problem? > > >> And memory_failure is not nmi-safe, so it can not be called directly in the >> SEA context. So we just handle this error at SEA exit path, and before context >> switching. > > (I need to look more into which locks memory_failure() is taking) > > >> In FFH mode, physical address can only be obtained by parsing the GHES table. >> But we only care about SEA, so the error handling is tied to the type of notification. > > I care about all the notification methods. Once the notification has been passed > to APEI I want them to behave the same so that we don't have subtle bugs between > the 11 different ways we could get a notification. This code is rarely tested > enough as it is. > >>From the arch code I just want to call out to APEI asking 'is this yours?'. If > so I expect APEI to have done all the work, if not we take the v8.0 behaviour. > > > Here you need APEI and the arch code to spot 'SEA' and treat it differently, > invoking some arm64-specific behaviour for APEI, and some > not-really-arch-specific code under /arch/arm64. There is nothing arm64 specific > about your arm_process_error(), how come the core APEI code doesn't need to do this? > > > I think this is caused by the way memory_failure() schedules its work, and that > is where I'd like to try and fix this, so that its the same for all notification > methods and all (cough: both) architectures. I try to see if there is a better way. > > >> The TIF flag is checked on a generic path, but it will only be set when SEA occurs. >> And if we use unlikely optimization, it should have little impact on performance. > > Yes, the arch code checks _TIF_WORK_MASK in one go so there is no performance > problem for code that hasn't taken the RAS-Error. (and once we've taken a RAS > error performance is out the window!) > >> And the TIF flag approach was used on x86 platform for years, until commit d4812e169d > > ... so x86 doesn't do this ... > >> (x86, mce: Get rid of TIF_MCE_NOTIFY and associated mce tricks)[0]. On currently arm64 >> platform, there is no IST interrupt[1] function, so we could not call memory_failure >> directly in SEA context. So the way to use TIF notification, is also a good choice, >> after all, the same way on x86 platform is verified. > > Thanks, looks like I need to read more of the history of x86's kernel-first > handling... > > > Thanks, > > James > > > . >
Hi James, I'll send v4 to fix some small issue, for same one who interested with this feature could test it. For the question you mentioned, I will study in depth. Any comments is welcome. On 2017/9/16 2:33, James Morse wrote: > Hi Xie XiuQi, > > On 11/09/17 15:11, Xie XiuQi wrote: >> I first describe the approach of this patchset: >> >> A memory access error on the execution path usually triggers SEA. >> According to the existing process, errors occurred in the kernel, >> leading to direct panic, if it occurred the user-space, we should >> just kill process. >> >> But there is a class of error, in fact, is not necessary to kill >> process, you can recover and continue to run the process. Such as >> the instruction data corrupted, where the memory page might be >> read-only, which is has not been modified, the disk might have the >> correct data, so you can directly drop the page, ant reload it when >> necessary. >> >> So this patchset is just try to solve such problem: if the error is >> consumed in user-space and the error occurs on a clean page, you can >> directly drop the memory page without killing process. >> >> This is implemented in memory_failure, which is generic process. > >> The error reported by SEA should be handled before re-enter the process, >> or we must kill the process to prevent error propagation. >> >> memory_failure_queue() is asynchronous, in which, error info was saved >> at ghes_proc, but handled in kworker. During this period there is a context >> switching, so we can not determine which process would be switch to. So >> memory_failure_queue is not suitable for handling the problem. > > Thanks for this summary. I see the problem you're trying to solve is when > memory_failure() runs, in your scenario its not guaranteed to run before we > return to user space. > > What is the user-visible symptom of this? SIGBUS, code=0 instead of SIGBUS, > code=...MCEERR_A? > > ..in which case I'm looking at this as a race with the memory_failure() bottom > half via schedule_work(). > > How does x86 avoid this same problem? > > >> And memory_failure is not nmi-safe, so it can not be called directly in the >> SEA context. So we just handle this error at SEA exit path, and before context >> switching. > > (I need to look more into which locks memory_failure() is taking) > > >> In FFH mode, physical address can only be obtained by parsing the GHES table. >> But we only care about SEA, so the error handling is tied to the type of notification. > > I care about all the notification methods. Once the notification has been passed > to APEI I want them to behave the same so that we don't have subtle bugs between > the 11 different ways we could get a notification. This code is rarely tested > enough as it is. > >>From the arch code I just want to call out to APEI asking 'is this yours?'. If > so I expect APEI to have done all the work, if not we take the v8.0 behaviour. > > > Here you need APEI and the arch code to spot 'SEA' and treat it differently, > invoking some arm64-specific behaviour for APEI, and some > not-really-arch-specific code under /arch/arm64. There is nothing arm64 specific > about your arm_process_error(), how come the core APEI code doesn't need to do this? > > > I think this is caused by the way memory_failure() schedules its work, and that > is where I'd like to try and fix this, so that its the same for all notification > methods and all (cough: both) architectures. > > >> The TIF flag is checked on a generic path, but it will only be set when SEA occurs. >> And if we use unlikely optimization, it should have little impact on performance. > > Yes, the arch code checks _TIF_WORK_MASK in one go so there is no performance > problem for code that hasn't taken the RAS-Error. (and once we've taken a RAS > error performance is out the window!) > > >> And the TIF flag approach was used on x86 platform for years, until commit d4812e169d > > ... so x86 doesn't do this ... > >> (x86, mce: Get rid of TIF_MCE_NOTIFY and associated mce tricks)[0]. On currently arm64 >> platform, there is no IST interrupt[1] function, so we could not call memory_failure >> directly in SEA context. So the way to use TIF notification, is also a good choice, >> after all, the same way on x86 platform is verified. > > Thanks, looks like I need to read more of the history of x86's kernel-first > handling... > > > Thanks, > > James > > > . >
diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig index dfd9086..7d44589 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig @@ -640,6 +640,17 @@ config HOTPLUG_CPU Say Y here to experiment with turning CPUs off and on. CPUs can be controlled through /sys/devices/system/cpu. +config ARM64_ERR_RECOV + bool "Support arm64 RAS error recovery" + depends on ACPI_APEI_SEA && MEMORY_FAILURE + help + With ARM v8.2 RAS Extension, SEA are usually triggered when memory errors + are consumed. In some cases, if the error address is in a clean page or a + read-only page, there is a chance to recover. Such as error occurs in a + instruction page, we can reread this page from disk instead of killing process. + + Say Y if unsure. + # Common NUMA Features config NUMA bool "Numa Memory Allocation and Scheduler Support" diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ras.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ras.h new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e174f95 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ras.h @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ +/* + * ARM64 SEA error recoery support + * + * Copyright 2017 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. + * Author: Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@huawei.com> + * Author: Wang Xiongfeng <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com> + * + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or + * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version + * 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation; + * + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the + * GNU General Public License for more details. + */ + +#ifndef _ASM_RAS_H +#define _ASM_RAS_H + +#include <linux/cper.h> +#include <linux/ras.h> +#include <acpi/ghes.h> + +extern void sea_notify_process(void); + +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ERR_RECOV +extern void arm_process_error(struct ghes *ghes, struct cper_sec_proc_arm *err); +#else +static inline void arm_process_error(struct ghes *ghes, struct cper_sec_proc_arm *err) +{ + log_arm_hw_error(err); +} +#endif /* CONFIG_ARM64_ERR_RECOV */ + +#endif /*_ASM_RAS_H*/ diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h index 46c3b93..4b10131 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ struct thread_info { #define TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME 2 /* callback before returning to user */ #define TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE 3 /* CPU's FP state is not current's */ #define TIF_UPROBE 4 /* uprobe breakpoint or singlestep */ +#define TIF_SEA_NOTIFY 5 /* notify to do an error recovery */ #define TIF_NOHZ 7 #define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE 8 #define TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT 9 @@ -102,6 +103,7 @@ struct thread_info { #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME (1 << TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME) #define _TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE (1 << TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE) #define _TIF_NOHZ (1 << TIF_NOHZ) +#define _TIF_SEA_NOTIFY (1 << TIF_SEA_NOTIFY) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT) @@ -111,7 +113,7 @@ struct thread_info { #define _TIF_WORK_MASK (_TIF_NEED_RESCHED | _TIF_SIGPENDING | \ _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE | \ - _TIF_UPROBE) + _TIF_UPROBE|_TIF_SEA_NOTIFY) #define _TIF_SYSCALL_WORK (_TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE | _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT | \ _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT | _TIF_SECCOMP | \ diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile b/arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile index f2b4e81..ba3abf8 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_EFI) += efi.o efi-entry.stub.o arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_PCI) += pci.o arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_ARMV8_DEPRECATED) += armv8_deprecated.o arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi.o +arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_ARM64_ERR_RECOV) += ras.o arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA) += acpi_numa.o arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_ARM64_ACPI_PARKING_PROTOCOL) += acpi_parking_protocol.o arm64-obj-$(CONFIG_PARAVIRT) += paravirt.o diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ras.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ras.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..797722d --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ras.c @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +/* + * ARM64 SEA error recoery support + * + * Copyright 2017 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. + * Author: Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@huawei.com> + * Author: Wang Xiongfeng <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com> + * + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or + * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version + * 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation; + * + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the + * GNU General Public License for more details. + */ + +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/cper.h> +#include <linux/mm.h> +#include <linux/preempt.h> +#include <linux/acpi.h> +#include <linux/sched/signal.h> +#include <linux/ras.h> + +#include <acpi/actbl1.h> +#include <acpi/ghes.h> +#include <acpi/apei.h> + +#include <asm/thread_info.h> +#include <asm/atomic.h> +#include <asm/ras.h> + +/* + * Need to save faulting physical address associated with a process + * in the sea ghes handler some place where we can grab it back + * later in sea_notify_process() + */ +#define SEA_INFO_MAX 16 + +struct sea_info { + atomic_t inuse; + struct task_struct *t; + __u64 paddr; +} sea_info[SEA_INFO_MAX]; + +static bool sea_save_info(__u64 addr) +{ + struct sea_info *si; + + for (si = sea_info; si < &sea_info[SEA_INFO_MAX]; si++) { + if (atomic_cmpxchg(&si->inuse, 0, 1) == 0) { + si->t = current; + si->paddr = addr; + return true; + } + } + + pr_err("Too many concurrent recoverable errors\n"); + return false; +} + +static struct sea_info *sea_find_info(void) +{ + struct sea_info *si; + + for (si = sea_info; si < &sea_info[SEA_INFO_MAX]; si++) + if (atomic_read(&si->inuse) && si->t == current) + return si; + return NULL; +} + +static void sea_clear_info(struct sea_info *si) +{ + atomic_set(&si->inuse, 0); +} + +/* + * Called in process context that interrupted by SEA and marked with + * TIF_SEA_NOTIFY, just before returning to erroneous userland. + * This code is allowed to sleep. + * Attempt possible recovery such as calling the high level VM handler to + * process any corrupted pages, and kill/signal current process if required. + * Action required errors are handled here. + */ +void sea_notify_process(void) +{ + unsigned long pfn; + int fail = 0, flags = MF_ACTION_REQUIRED; + struct sea_info *si = sea_find_info(); + + if (!si) + panic("Lost physical address for consumed uncorrectable error"); + + clear_thread_flag(TIF_SEA_NOTIFY); + do { + pfn = si->paddr >> PAGE_SHIFT; + + + pr_err("Uncorrected hardware memory error in user-access at %llx\n", + si->paddr); + /* + * We must call memory_failure() here even if the current process is + * doomed. We still need to mark the page as poisoned and alert any + * other users of the page. + */ + if (memory_failure(pfn, 0, flags) < 0) + fail++; + + sea_clear_info(si); + + si = sea_find_info(); + } while (si); + + if (fail) { + pr_err("Memory error not recovered\n"); + force_sig(SIGBUS, current); + } +} + +void arm_process_error(struct ghes *ghes, struct cper_sec_proc_arm *err) +{ + int i; + bool info_saved = false; + struct cper_arm_err_info *err_info; + + log_arm_hw_error(err); + + if ((ghes->generic->notify.type != ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SEA) || + (ghes->estatus->error_severity != CPER_SEV_RECOVERABLE)) + return; + + err_info = (struct cper_arm_err_info *)(err + 1); + for (i = 0; i < err->err_info_num; i++, err_info++) { + if (err_info->validation_bits & CPER_ARM_INFO_VALID_PHYSICAL_ADDR) + info_saved |= sea_save_info(err_info->physical_fault_addr); + } + + if (info_saved) + set_thread_flag(TIF_SEA_NOTIFY); +} diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c index 089c3747..71e314e 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ #include <asm/fpsimd.h> #include <asm/signal32.h> #include <asm/vdso.h> +#include <asm/ras.h> /* * Do a signal return; undo the signal stack. These are aligned to 128-bit. @@ -749,6 +750,13 @@ asmlinkage void do_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *regs, * Update the trace code with the current status. */ trace_hardirqs_off(); + +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ERR_RECOV + /* notify userspace of pending SEAs */ + if (thread_flags & _TIF_SEA_NOTIFY) + sea_notify_process(); +#endif /* CONFIG_ARM64_ERR_RECOV */ + do { if (thread_flags & _TIF_NEED_RESCHED) { schedule(); diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c index 1f22a41..b38476d 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c @@ -594,14 +594,25 @@ static int do_sea(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr, struct pt_regs *regs) nmi_exit(); } - info.si_signo = SIGBUS; - info.si_errno = 0; - info.si_code = 0; - if (esr & ESR_ELx_FnV) - info.si_addr = NULL; - else - info.si_addr = (void __user *)addr; - arm64_notify_die("", regs, &info, esr); + if (user_mode(regs)) { + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SEA_NOTIFY)) + return ret; + + info.si_signo = SIGBUS; + info.si_errno = 0; + info.si_code = 0; + if (esr & ESR_ELx_FnV) + info.si_addr = NULL; + else + info.si_addr = (void __user *)addr; + + current->thread.fault_address = 0; + current->thread.fault_code = esr; + force_sig_info(info.si_signo, &info, current); + } else { + die("Uncorrected hardware memory error in kernel-access\n", + regs, esr); + } return ret; } diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c index d661d45..502335c 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c @@ -46,12 +46,12 @@ #include <linux/nmi.h> #include <linux/sched/clock.h> #include <linux/uuid.h> -#include <linux/ras.h> #include <acpi/actbl1.h> #include <acpi/ghes.h> #include <acpi/apei.h> #include <asm/tlbflush.h> +#include <asm/ras.h> #include <ras/ras_event.h> #include "apei-internal.h" @@ -520,7 +520,7 @@ static void ghes_do_proc(struct ghes *ghes, else if (guid_equal(sec_type, &CPER_SEC_PROC_ARM)) { struct cper_sec_proc_arm *err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata); - log_arm_hw_error(err); + arm_process_error(ghes, err); } else { void *err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);