From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E24C0CCA473 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 04:43:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3BDAC6B0073; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 00:43:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 36D616B0074; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 00:43:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 235C06B0075; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 00:43:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 130B06B0073 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 00:43:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin13.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C46120C38 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 04:43:09 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79557452898.13.1110B08 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) by imf13.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3383D20039 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 04:43:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dggpemm500022.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.57]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4LJWf26nYGzjX3f; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 12:42:02 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemm500001.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.107) by dggpemm500022.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.162) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 12:43:01 +0800 Received: from [10.174.177.243] (10.174.177.243) by dggpemm500001.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 12:43:00 +0800 Message-ID: <6763271f-6f65-b83a-6892-dbd502368f5e@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2022 12:43:00 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1 Subject: Re: [next] arm64: boot failed - next-20220606 Content-Language: en-US From: Kefeng Wang To: Vasily Averin , Naresh Kamboju , Shakeel Butt , Linux ARM CC: Stephen Rothwell , Linux-Next Mailing List , open list , , , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , "Ard Biesheuvel" , Arnd Bergmann , Catalin Marinas , Raghuram Thammiraju , Mark Brown , Will Deacon , "Roman Gushchin" , Qian Cai References: <20220607162504.7fd5a92a@canb.auug.org.au> <2a4cc632-c936-1e42-4fdc-572334c58ee1@openvz.org> <44530040-0384-796e-143f-b7293886753c@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <44530040-0384-796e-143f-b7293886753c@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.177.243] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.182) To dggpemm500001.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.107) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1654749788; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Xldxij3MZeMJ6I7XUBwFIa7NgxsnygCLILL282Vs0iOQFTjumlf8ffXGD4dyJF3iV0c1+0 P9t4EBESOkY6ESfVj8S3CplhOldqVEi1AJ5bsuYrvs5wmn3yKbnF1yQqV3qATzCiBC9pVg zufMBzpJ3Pwubv66gGULkfjllltn0Uk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1654749788; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=cdoYznewMCUcfIRQafixlSX0FRu+V1Fle1rBghjEbWc=; b=MKMZ0frqERDzuYVUlv219e1bs4AYJTT6+z032+qG8GhQyr8+naAf7de3zt0gYJlkyWJ9QB 23bJXWbFD8XqHL5GDQoQZGkxIOChArqEJe+3v0uXYPtASmbsarOEt09aIOwH2OZw8Rn+Rp MBTAmQVbJDKB8WWXPP43YS/AyNwvmFw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf13.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf13.hostedemail.com: domain of wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com Authentication-Results: imf13.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf13.hostedemail.com: domain of wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com X-Stat-Signature: phmr5rjxaoz97bmwr81zxyi7jib5cfdm X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3383D20039 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1654749787-136888 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 2022/6/9 11:44, Kefeng Wang wrote: > > On 2022/6/9 10:49, Vasily Averin wrote: >> Dear ARM developers, >> could you please help me to find the reason of this problem? > Hi, >> mem_cgroup_from_obj(): >> ffff80000836cf40:       d503245f        bti     c >> ffff80000836cf44:       d503201f        nop >> ffff80000836cf48:       d503201f        nop >> ffff80000836cf4c:       d503233f        paciasp >> ffff80000836cf50:       d503201f        nop >> ffff80000836cf54:       d2e00021        mov     x1, >> #0x1000000000000            // #281474976710656 >> ffff80000836cf58:       8b010001        add     x1, x0, x1 >> ffff80000836cf5c:       b25657e4        mov     x4, >> #0xfffffc0000000000         // #-4398046511104 >> ffff80000836cf60:       d34cfc21        lsr     x1, x1, #12 >> ffff80000836cf64:       d37ae421        lsl     x1, x1, #6 >> ffff80000836cf68:       8b040022        add     x2, x1, x4 >> ffff80000836cf6c:       f9400443        ldr     x3, [x2, #8] >> >> x5 : ffff80000a96f000 x4 : fffffc0000000000 x3 : ffff80000ad5e680 >> x2 : fffffe00002bc240 x1 : 00000200002bc240 x0 : ffff80000af09740 >> >> x0 = 0xffff80000af09740 is an argument of mem_cgroup_from_obj() >> according to System.map it is init_net >> >> This issue is caused by calling virt_to_page() on address of static >> variable init_net. >> Arm64 consider that addresses of static variables are not valid >> virtual addresses. >> On x86_64 the same API works without any problem. >> >> Unfortunately I do not understand the cause of the problem. >> I do not see any bugs in my patch. >> I'm using an existing API, mem_cgroup_from_obj(), to find the memory >> cgroup used >> to account for the specified object. >> In particular, in the current case, I wanted to get the memory cgroup >> of the >> specified network namespace by the name taken from for_each_net(). >> The first object in this list is the static structure unit_net > > root@test:~# cat /proc/kallsyms |grep -w _data > ffff80000a110000 D _data > root@test:~# cat /proc/kallsyms |grep -w _end > ffff80000a500000 B _end > root@test:~# cat /proc/kallsyms |grep -w init_net > ffff80000a4eb980 B init_net > > the init_net is located in data section, on arm64, it is allowed by > vmalloc, see > >     map_kernel_segment(pgdp, _data, _end, PAGE_KERNEL, &vmlinux_data, > 0, 0); > > and the arm has same behavior. > > We could let init_net be allocated dynamically, but I think it could > change a lot. > > Any better sugguestion, Catalin? or  add vmalloc check in mem_cgroup_from_obj()? diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c index 27cebaa53472..fb817e5da5f0 100644 --- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c @@ -2860,7 +2860,10 @@ struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_from_obj(void *p)         if (mem_cgroup_disabled())                 return NULL; -       folio = virt_to_folio(p); +       if (unlikely(is_vmalloc_addr(p))) +               folio = page_folio(vmalloc_to_page(p)); +       else +               folio = virt_to_folio(p);         /*          * Slab objects are accounted individually, not per-page.