linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@huawei.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	"Alexander Viro" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, <x86@kernel.org>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	<linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
	Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@huawei.com>, Guohanjun <guohanjun@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v4 3/7] arm64: add support for machine check error safe
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 11:36:41 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bdb1c6-5803-d9c0-9208-432027ae1d8b@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yo3pP/Y+6HHuVBns@FVFF77S0Q05N>



在 2022/5/25 16:30, Mark Rutland 写道:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 02:29:54PM +0800, Tong Tiangen wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 2022/5/13 23:26, Mark Rutland 写道:
>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 03:04:14AM +0000, Tong Tiangen wrote:
>>>> During the processing of arm64 kernel hardware memory errors(do_sea()), if
>>>> the errors is consumed in the kernel, the current processing is panic.
>>>> However, it is not optimal.
>>>>
>>>> Take uaccess for example, if the uaccess operation fails due to memory
>>>> error, only the user process will be affected, kill the user process
>>>> and isolate the user page with hardware memory errors is a better choice.
>>>
>>> Conceptually, I'm fine with the idea of constraining what we do for a
>>> true uaccess, but I don't like the implementation of this at all, and I
>>> think we first need to clean up the arm64 extable usage to clearly
>>> distinguish a uaccess from another access.
>>
>> OK,using EX_TYPE_UACCESS and this extable type could be recover, this is
>> more reasonable.
> 
> Great.
> 
>> For EX_TYPE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO, today we use it for kernel accesses in a
>> couple of cases, such as
>> get_user/futex/__user_cache_maint()/__user_swpX_asm(),
> 
> Those are all user accesses.
> 
> However, __get_kernel_nofault() and __put_kernel_nofault() use
> EX_TYPE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO by way of __{get,put}_mem_asm(), so we'd need to
> refactor that code to split the user/kernel cases higher up the callchain.
> 
>> your suggestion is:
>> get_user continues to use EX_TYPE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO and the other cases use
>> new type EX_TYPE_FIXUP_ERR_ZERO?
> 
> Yes, that's the rough shape. We could make the latter EX_TYPE_KACCESS_ERR_ZERO
> to be clearly analogous to EX_TYPE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO, and with that I susepct we
> could remove EX_TYPE_FIXUP.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark.
According to your suggestion, i think the definition is like this:

#define EX_TYPE_NONE                    0
#define EX_TYPE_FIXUP                   1    --> delete
#define EX_TYPE_BPF                     2
#define EX_TYPE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO        3
#define EX_TYPE_LOAD_UNALIGNED_ZEROPAD  4
#define EX_TYPE_UACCESS		        xx   --> add
#define EX_TYPE_KACCESS_ERR_ZERO        xx   --> add
[The value defined by the macro here is temporary]

There are two points to modify:

1、_get_kernel_nofault() and __put_kernel_nofault()  using 
EX_TYPE_KACCESS_ERR_ZERO, Other positions using 
EX_TYPE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO keep unchanged.

2、delete EX_TYPE_FIXUP.

There is no doubt about others. As for EX_TYPE_FIXUP, I think it needs 
to be retained, _cond_extable(EX_TYPE_FIXUP) is still in use in assembler.h.

Thanks,
Tong.

> .


  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-26  3:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-20  3:04 [PATCH -next v4 0/7]arm64: add machine check safe support Tong Tiangen
2022-04-20  3:04 ` [PATCH -next v4 1/7] x86, powerpc: fix function define in copy_mc_to_user Tong Tiangen
2022-04-22  9:45   ` Michael Ellerman
2022-04-24  1:16     ` Tong Tiangen
2022-05-02 14:24   ` Christophe Leroy
2022-05-03  1:06     ` Tong Tiangen
2022-05-05  1:21       ` Kefeng Wang
2022-04-20  3:04 ` [PATCH -next v4 2/7] arm64: fix types in copy_highpage() Tong Tiangen
2022-04-20  3:04 ` [PATCH -next v4 3/7] arm64: add support for machine check error safe Tong Tiangen
2022-05-13 15:26   ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-19  6:29     ` Tong Tiangen
2022-05-25  8:30       ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-26  3:36         ` Tong Tiangen [this message]
2022-05-26  9:50           ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-27  1:40             ` Tong Tiangen
2022-04-20  3:04 ` [PATCH -next v4 4/7] arm64: add copy_{to, from}_user to machine check safe Tong Tiangen
2022-05-04 10:26   ` Catalin Marinas
2022-05-05  6:39     ` Tong Tiangen
2022-05-05 13:41       ` Catalin Marinas
2022-05-05 14:33         ` Tong Tiangen
2022-05-13 15:31   ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-19  6:53     ` Tong Tiangen
2022-04-20  3:04 ` [PATCH -next v4 5/7] arm64: mte: Clean up user tag accessors Tong Tiangen
2022-05-13 15:36   ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-20  3:04 ` [PATCH -next v4 6/7] arm64: add {get, put}_user to machine check safe Tong Tiangen
2022-05-13 15:39   ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-19  7:09     ` Tong Tiangen
2022-04-20  3:04 ` [PATCH -next v4 7/7] arm64: add cow " Tong Tiangen
2022-05-13 15:44   ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-19 10:38     ` Tong Tiangen
2022-04-27  9:09 ` [PATCH -next v4 0/7]arm64: add machine check safe support Tong Tiangen
2022-05-04 19:58 ` (subset) " Catalin Marinas
2022-05-16 18:45 ` Catalin Marinas

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=87bdb1c6-5803-d9c0-9208-432027ae1d8b@huawei.com \
    --to=tongtiangen@huawei.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xiexiuqi@huawei.com \
    /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