From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
To: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
Cc: agl@us.ibm.com, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au, ak@suse.de,
linux-mm@kvack.org, discuss@x86-64.org
Subject: Re: BUG in x86_64 hugepage support
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:35:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060315043544.GD5526@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200603150403.k2F43Kg10964@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
On 14.03.2006 [20:03:20 -0800], Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> Nishanth Aravamudan wrote on Tuesday, March 14, 2006 5:20 PM
> > While doing some testing of libhugetlbfs, I ran into the following
> > BUGs on my x86_64 box when checking mprotect with hugepages (running
> > make func in libhugetlbfs is all it took here) (distro is Ubuntu
> > Dapper, runs 32-bit userspace).
> >
> > So, the first &= results in the lower 11 bits of pte_val(pte) being
> > all 0s. By my analysis, this is the problem, pte_modify() on x86_64
> > is clearing the bits we check to see if a pte is a hugetlb one. To
> > see if this might be an accurate analysis, I modified _PAGE_CHG_MASK
> > as follows:
> >
> > -#define _PAGE_CHG_MASK (PTE_MASK | _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_DIRTY)
> > +#define _PAGE_CHG_MASK (PTE_MASK | _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_DIRTY | _PAGE_PSE | _PAGE_PRESENT)
> >
> > That is, forcing the bits we care about to get set in pte_modify().
> > This removed the BUG()s I was seeing in our testing.
>
> I think your analysis looked correct. Though I don't think you want
> to add _PAGE_PRESENT to _PAGE_CHG_MASK. The reason being newprot
> suppose to have correct present bit (based on what the new protection
> is) and it will be or'ed to form new pte.
Thanks for the response!
> I think _PAGE_PSE bit should be in _PAGE_CHG_MASK.
I can try a kernel with just the _PAGE_PSE bit added to _PAGE_CHG_MASK
and see if that helps. I think it will still BUG() in my case, however,
as __LARGE_PTE is 10000001, so only setting the 8th bit will be
insufficient. So maybe there is also something wrong with what is being
generated by pgprot_val(newprot)? I will try adding some more debugging
output to see what is happening in pte_modify.
Thanks,
Nish
--
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-15 4:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-15 1:20 Nishanth Aravamudan
2006-03-15 4:03 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-03-15 4:35 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2006-03-15 7:08 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-03-15 7:30 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2006-03-15 8:50 ` [discuss] " Jan Beulich
2006-03-15 10:03 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-03-15 15:14 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2006-03-15 15:56 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2006-03-15 15:13 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
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=20060315043544.GD5526@us.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=agl@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/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