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 34FC6C433EF for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 15:23:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 7BF8E8D0029; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 11:23:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 76C828D0022; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 11:23:39 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 60DC48D0029; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 11:23:39 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5254F8D0022 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 11:23:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C44061623 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 15:23:39 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79559066958.08.06F9235 Received: from mail-pg1-f182.google.com (mail-pg1-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A9BA007F for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2022 15:23:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f182.google.com with SMTP id e66so22106223pgc.8 for ; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 08:23:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YV7RC7djtxI0kHw5S5FDRQb2joRqGeuY1mF5zw0phKk=; b=lSf0tQldx/w/ULdeiOjWFksRRZOHkwFQ+zi7S6eUMpPE+euTNq3HfakFsiKn+akZgA BYsNOZN6AKF8VG7tGzdoYC3XsUS9zpNzK4OTBz8SkU/vOjzA6DCrzImFZh8K5L5045nO gtaGCeNE0sEYaJtDzQI5dYct1BCJ/LUA0kDrZ29TbBynMGr3m+1dUjIO/8+rinAeI8Ge ZM4yM/D1Q/S8svh4b8VSGnrbrPC6w7hLXcJ2xNJO9bZ0AbME7FRMvC58Wsw5XYedMd43 VYw31UYqRn0Gr/rFapRiPydIJmWwSdOVdFFbZ/5OT8ysrKDH3W9qbrHeYJTS7UfCRGnm J0ug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YV7RC7djtxI0kHw5S5FDRQb2joRqGeuY1mF5zw0phKk=; b=g7U/7DlzEJirkBt7D418V9NPft0n1kLbtimj12ceq81X+r3ogMnRtWu8s2D7QGNNrn xHAzKGmfUWgFnOTGV46gyWX0cC8/jRHKWhH9A034jih65WWbVq4CdELaYkVPJIX32wLa gFbX8KvS3Rfat/GzAcb3EqYNr4NVmoj9TjHhHmzqLZHKcRdV+C8DOXqVUJToWI3CQniS Pd7fDISpTLM7QWO6YssYQaxe+tyP/RmKs4PDQnmr7/CTDDLVqI1ArWfZmAzT/m5G7a+1 0cUF+r1+8E2YXFWJg7MdAO+CO42to8kaMNFFIa5fP97ETy+cerTAPfGzMFUiQIrersem fTGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533l7Pyw+8ddz74g0g+S54m/iP0+dKU8FQO57kty8UNsZT+/cFrI XMeFM35njfl5PoyQ49cNYvtHg1p0DNXtrgSkXTJMvQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy/KwvUBHnh2VRlvCqbK+o5hSwHlwE0i9AJu6gcHX/fyizWfCV7lcs5p6BiMXf7TYQ8FWcrUdEhtuopEnRW2Zg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:889:b0:510:91e6:6463 with SMTP id q9-20020a056a00088900b0051091e66463mr40895230pfj.58.1654788216841; Thu, 09 Jun 2022 08:23:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220607162504.7fd5a92a@canb.auug.org.au> <2a4cc632-c936-1e42-4fdc-572334c58ee1@openvz.org> <44530040-0384-796e-143f-b7293886753c@huawei.com> <20220609101153.GB2187@willie-the-truck> In-Reply-To: From: Shakeel Butt Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2022 08:23:25 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [next] arm64: boot failed - next-20220606 To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Will Deacon , Kefeng Wang , Vasily Averin , Naresh Kamboju , Linux ARM , Stephen Rothwell , Linux-Next Mailing List , open list , regressions@lists.linux.dev, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Ard Biesheuvel , Arnd Bergmann , Raghuram Thammiraju , Mark Brown , Roman Gushchin , Qian Cai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1654788218; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=jXTKixtGl7bo4zxLevI5K1Qv+tp+D/L1LV9c3PgoxmdceJeMamJUatFBoswPkolkfcRSQM 2wdQguCZiqROBRDdw9QEgMLPOi8CldsL2PPRs9BuiXKbbMrWBvmU6hpG26G8bZWg9E+MbD bUpfUQruVXS3xgGUuI5b4110q3GXeRI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=lSf0tQld; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of shakeelb@google.com designates 209.85.215.182 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shakeelb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1654788218; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=YV7RC7djtxI0kHw5S5FDRQb2joRqGeuY1mF5zw0phKk=; b=nVmS3MVD8XvZsElHTRxIx6q7YbnCnCPlnQvdKF3oInPi8exxd9vAnXEir0iMivs1N/a5Pw snANSQ/T7UG6jkYMi4cPFUosKLmQAm6YvEqn+i0iQNe+pBLA5/DxMEDAp8QHsgMMEdlngq Ipx0K3AfN7dHaQui+RT5dwPWMF4oSQo= X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48A9BA007F X-Stat-Signature: yoauopf8xng384inhyrcxnu5bmbosx6c X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=lSf0tQld; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of shakeelb@google.com designates 209.85.215.182 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shakeelb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com X-HE-Tag: 1654788218-779906 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 Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:26 AM Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 11:11:54AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 11:44:09AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: > > > On 2022/6/9 10:49, Vasily Averin wrote: > > > > 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. > > > > This just depends on whether or not the kernel is running out of the linear > > mapping or not. On arm64, we use the vmalloc area for the kernel image and > > so virt_to_page() won't work, just like it won't work for modules on other > > architectures. > > > > How are module addresses handled by mem_cgroup_from_obj()? > > It doesn't look like they are handled in any way. It just expects the > pointer to be a linear map one. Yes, that is correct. > Something like below: > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > index 27cebaa53472..795bf3673fa7 100644 > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -2860,6 +2860,11 @@ struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_from_obj(void *p) > if (mem_cgroup_disabled()) > return NULL; > > + if (is_module_address((unsigned long)p)) > + return NULL; > + else if (is_kernel((unsigned long)p)) > + return NULL; > + How about just is_vmalloc_addr(p) check? It should cover modules and also arm64 using vmalloc for kernel image cases. > folio = virt_to_folio(p); > > /* > > -- > Catalin