Message ID | 166153429427.2758201.14605968329933175594.stgit@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | mm, xfs, dax: Fixes for memory_failure() handling | expand |
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:18:14AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > In the case where a filesystem is polled to take over the memory failure > and receives -EOPNOTSUPP it indicates that page->index and page->mapping > are valid for reverse mapping the failure address. Introduce > FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF to distinguish when add_to_kill() is being called > from mf_dax_kill_procs() by a filesytem vs the typical memory_failure() > path. > > Otherwise, vma_pgoff_address() is called with an invalid fsdax_pgoff > which then trips this failing signature: > > kernel BUG at mm/memory-failure.c:319! > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > CPU: 13 PID: 1262 Comm: dax-pmd Tainted: G OE N 6.0.0-rc2+ #62 > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015 > RIP: 0010:add_to_kill.cold+0x19d/0x209 > [..] > Call Trace: > <TASK> > collect_procs.part.0+0x2c4/0x460 > memory_failure+0x71b/0xba0 > ? _printk+0x58/0x73 > do_madvise.part.0.cold+0xaf/0xc5 > > Fixes: c36e20249571 ("mm: introduce mf_dax_kill_procs() for fsdax case") > Cc: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > Cc: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> > Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > Cc: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.de> > Cc: Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com> > Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> > Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > Cc: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Acked-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>
On 2022/8/27 1:18, Dan Williams wrote: > In the case where a filesystem is polled to take over the memory failure > and receives -EOPNOTSUPP it indicates that page->index and page->mapping > are valid for reverse mapping the failure address. Introduce > FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF to distinguish when add_to_kill() is being called > from mf_dax_kill_procs() by a filesytem vs the typical memory_failure() > path. Thanks for fixing. I'm sorry but I can't find the bug report email. Do you mean mf_dax_kill_procs() can pass an invalid pgoff to the add_to_kill()? But it seems pgoff is guarded against invalid value by vma_interval_tree_foreach() in collect_procs_fsdax(). So pgoff should be an valid value. Or am I miss something? Thanks, Miaohe Lin > > Otherwise, vma_pgoff_address() is called with an invalid fsdax_pgoff > which then trips this failing signature: > > kernel BUG at mm/memory-failure.c:319! > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI > CPU: 13 PID: 1262 Comm: dax-pmd Tainted: G OE N 6.0.0-rc2+ #62 > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015 > RIP: 0010:add_to_kill.cold+0x19d/0x209 > [..] > Call Trace: > <TASK> > collect_procs.part.0+0x2c4/0x460 > memory_failure+0x71b/0xba0 > ? _printk+0x58/0x73 > do_madvise.part.0.cold+0xaf/0xc5 > > Fixes: c36e20249571 ("mm: introduce mf_dax_kill_procs() for fsdax case") > Cc: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > Cc: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> > Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> > Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > Cc: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.de> > Cc: Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com> > Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> > Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> > Cc: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> > --- > mm/memory-failure.c | 22 ++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c > index 8a4294afbfa0..e424a9dac749 100644 > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c > @@ -345,13 +345,17 @@ static unsigned long dev_pagemap_mapping_shift(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > * not much we can do. We just print a message and ignore otherwise. > */ > > +#define FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF ULONG_MAX > + > /* > * Schedule a process for later kill. > * Uses GFP_ATOMIC allocations to avoid potential recursions in the VM. > * > - * Notice: @fsdax_pgoff is used only when @p is a fsdax page. > - * In other cases, such as anonymous and file-backend page, the address to be > - * killed can be caculated by @p itself. > + * Note: @fsdax_pgoff is used only when @p is a fsdax page and a > + * filesystem with a memory failure handler has claimed the > + * memory_failure event. In all other cases, page->index and > + * page->mapping are sufficient for mapping the page back to its > + * corresponding user virtual address. > */ > static void add_to_kill(struct task_struct *tsk, struct page *p, > pgoff_t fsdax_pgoff, struct vm_area_struct *vma, > @@ -367,11 +371,7 @@ static void add_to_kill(struct task_struct *tsk, struct page *p, > > tk->addr = page_address_in_vma(p, vma); > if (is_zone_device_page(p)) { > - /* > - * Since page->mapping is not used for fsdax, we need > - * calculate the address based on the vma. > - */ > - if (p->pgmap->type == MEMORY_DEVICE_FS_DAX) > + if (fsdax_pgoff != FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF) > tk->addr = vma_pgoff_address(fsdax_pgoff, 1, vma); > tk->size_shift = dev_pagemap_mapping_shift(vma, tk->addr); > } else > @@ -523,7 +523,8 @@ static void collect_procs_anon(struct page *page, struct list_head *to_kill, > if (!page_mapped_in_vma(page, vma)) > continue; > if (vma->vm_mm == t->mm) > - add_to_kill(t, page, 0, vma, to_kill); > + add_to_kill(t, page, FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF, vma, > + to_kill); > } > } > read_unlock(&tasklist_lock); > @@ -559,7 +560,8 @@ static void collect_procs_file(struct page *page, struct list_head *to_kill, > * to be informed of all such data corruptions. > */ > if (vma->vm_mm == t->mm) > - add_to_kill(t, page, 0, vma, to_kill); > + add_to_kill(t, page, FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF, vma, > + to_kill); > } > } > read_unlock(&tasklist_lock); > > > . >
Miaohe Lin wrote: > On 2022/8/27 1:18, Dan Williams wrote: > > In the case where a filesystem is polled to take over the memory failure > > and receives -EOPNOTSUPP it indicates that page->index and page->mapping > > are valid for reverse mapping the failure address. Introduce > > FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF to distinguish when add_to_kill() is being called > > from mf_dax_kill_procs() by a filesytem vs the typical memory_failure() > > path. > > Thanks for fixing. > I'm sorry but I can't find the bug report email. Report is here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/63069db388d43_1b3229426@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch/ > Do you mean mf_dax_kill_procs() can pass an invalid pgoff to the > add_to_kill()? No, the problem is that ->notify_failure() returns -EOPNOTSUPP so memory_failure_dev_pagemap() falls back to mf_generic_kill_procs(). However, mf_generic_kill_procs() end up passing '0' for fsdax_pgoff from collect_procs_file() to add_to_kill(). A '0' for fsdax_pgoff results in vma_pgoff_address() returning -EFAULT which causes the VM_BUG_ON() in dev_pagemap_mapping_shift().
On 2022/8/30 11:57, Dan Williams wrote: > Miaohe Lin wrote: >> On 2022/8/27 1:18, Dan Williams wrote: >>> In the case where a filesystem is polled to take over the memory failure >>> and receives -EOPNOTSUPP it indicates that page->index and page->mapping >>> are valid for reverse mapping the failure address. Introduce >>> FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF to distinguish when add_to_kill() is being called >>> from mf_dax_kill_procs() by a filesytem vs the typical memory_failure() >>> path. >> >> Thanks for fixing. >> I'm sorry but I can't find the bug report email. > > Report is here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/63069db388d43_1b3229426@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch/ > >> Do you mean mf_dax_kill_procs() can pass an invalid pgoff to the >> add_to_kill()? > > No, the problem is that ->notify_failure() returns -EOPNOTSUPP so > memory_failure_dev_pagemap() falls back to mf_generic_kill_procs(). > However, mf_generic_kill_procs() end up passing '0' for fsdax_pgoff from > collect_procs_file() to add_to_kill(). A '0' for fsdax_pgoff results in > vma_pgoff_address() returning -EFAULT which causes the VM_BUG_ON() in > dev_pagemap_mapping_shift(). Many thanks for your explanation. Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> Thanks, Miaohe Lin
Looks good:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c index 8a4294afbfa0..e424a9dac749 100644 --- a/mm/memory-failure.c +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c @@ -345,13 +345,17 @@ static unsigned long dev_pagemap_mapping_shift(struct vm_area_struct *vma, * not much we can do. We just print a message and ignore otherwise. */ +#define FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF ULONG_MAX + /* * Schedule a process for later kill. * Uses GFP_ATOMIC allocations to avoid potential recursions in the VM. * - * Notice: @fsdax_pgoff is used only when @p is a fsdax page. - * In other cases, such as anonymous and file-backend page, the address to be - * killed can be caculated by @p itself. + * Note: @fsdax_pgoff is used only when @p is a fsdax page and a + * filesystem with a memory failure handler has claimed the + * memory_failure event. In all other cases, page->index and + * page->mapping are sufficient for mapping the page back to its + * corresponding user virtual address. */ static void add_to_kill(struct task_struct *tsk, struct page *p, pgoff_t fsdax_pgoff, struct vm_area_struct *vma, @@ -367,11 +371,7 @@ static void add_to_kill(struct task_struct *tsk, struct page *p, tk->addr = page_address_in_vma(p, vma); if (is_zone_device_page(p)) { - /* - * Since page->mapping is not used for fsdax, we need - * calculate the address based on the vma. - */ - if (p->pgmap->type == MEMORY_DEVICE_FS_DAX) + if (fsdax_pgoff != FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF) tk->addr = vma_pgoff_address(fsdax_pgoff, 1, vma); tk->size_shift = dev_pagemap_mapping_shift(vma, tk->addr); } else @@ -523,7 +523,8 @@ static void collect_procs_anon(struct page *page, struct list_head *to_kill, if (!page_mapped_in_vma(page, vma)) continue; if (vma->vm_mm == t->mm) - add_to_kill(t, page, 0, vma, to_kill); + add_to_kill(t, page, FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF, vma, + to_kill); } } read_unlock(&tasklist_lock); @@ -559,7 +560,8 @@ static void collect_procs_file(struct page *page, struct list_head *to_kill, * to be informed of all such data corruptions. */ if (vma->vm_mm == t->mm) - add_to_kill(t, page, 0, vma, to_kill); + add_to_kill(t, page, FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF, vma, + to_kill); } } read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
In the case where a filesystem is polled to take over the memory failure and receives -EOPNOTSUPP it indicates that page->index and page->mapping are valid for reverse mapping the failure address. Introduce FSDAX_INVALID_PGOFF to distinguish when add_to_kill() is being called from mf_dax_kill_procs() by a filesytem vs the typical memory_failure() path. Otherwise, vma_pgoff_address() is called with an invalid fsdax_pgoff which then trips this failing signature: kernel BUG at mm/memory-failure.c:319! invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI CPU: 13 PID: 1262 Comm: dax-pmd Tainted: G OE N 6.0.0-rc2+ #62 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015 RIP: 0010:add_to_kill.cold+0x19d/0x209 [..] Call Trace: <TASK> collect_procs.part.0+0x2c4/0x460 memory_failure+0x71b/0xba0 ? _printk+0x58/0x73 do_madvise.part.0.cold+0xaf/0xc5 Fixes: c36e20249571 ("mm: introduce mf_dax_kill_procs() for fsdax case") Cc: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Cc: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Cc: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.de> Cc: Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> Cc: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> --- mm/memory-failure.c | 22 ++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)