On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 16:49:14 +0100
David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 14.12.18 16:22, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 12.12.18 18:27, Mikhail Zaslonko wrote:
> >> If memory end is not aligned with the sparse memory section boundary, the
> >> mapping of such a section is only partly initialized. This may lead to
> >> VM_BUG_ON due to uninitialized struct page access from
> >> is_mem_section_removable() or test_pages_in_a_zone() function triggered by
> >> memory_hotplug sysfs handlers:
> >>
> >> Here are the the panic examples:
> >> CONFIG_DEBUG_VM=y
> >> CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_PGFLAGS=y
> >>
> >> kernel parameter mem=2050M
> >> --------------------------
> >> page:000003d082008000 is uninitialized and poisoned
> >> page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PagePoisoned(p))
> >> Call Trace:
> >> ([<0000000000385b26>] test_pages_in_a_zone+0xde/0x160)
> >> [<00000000008f15c4>] show_valid_zones+0x5c/0x190
> >> [<00000000008cf9c4>] dev_attr_show+0x34/0x70
> >> [<0000000000463ad0>] sysfs_kf_seq_show+0xc8/0x148
> >> [<00000000003e4194>] seq_read+0x204/0x480
> >> [<00000000003b53ea>] __vfs_read+0x32/0x178
> >> [<00000000003b55b2>] vfs_read+0x82/0x138
> >> [<00000000003b5be2>] ksys_read+0x5a/0xb0
> >> [<0000000000b86ba0>] system_call+0xdc/0x2d8
> >> Last Breaking-Event-Address:
> >> [<0000000000385b26>] test_pages_in_a_zone+0xde/0x160
> >> Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception: panic_on_oops
> >>
> >> kernel parameter mem=3075M
> >> --------------------------
> >> page:000003d08300c000 is uninitialized and poisoned
> >> page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PagePoisoned(p))
> >> Call Trace:
> >> ([<000000000038596c>] is_mem_section_removable+0xb4/0x190)
> >> [<00000000008f12fa>] show_mem_removable+0x9a/0xd8
> >> [<00000000008cf9c4>] dev_attr_show+0x34/0x70
> >> [<0000000000463ad0>] sysfs_kf_seq_show+0xc8/0x148
> >> [<00000000003e4194>] seq_read+0x204/0x480
> >> [<00000000003b53ea>] __vfs_read+0x32/0x178
> >> [<00000000003b55b2>] vfs_read+0x82/0x138
> >> [<00000000003b5be2>] ksys_read+0x5a/0xb0
> >> [<0000000000b86ba0>] system_call+0xdc/0x2d8
> >> Last Breaking-Event-Address:
> >> [<000000000038596c>] is_mem_section_removable+0xb4/0x190
> >> Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception: panic_on_oops
> >>
> >> Fix the problem by initializing the last memory section of each zone
> >> in memmap_init_zone() till the very end, even if it goes beyond the zone
> >> end.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mikhail Zaslonko <zaslonko@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Reviewed-by: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> mm/page_alloc.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> >> index 2ec9cc407216..e2afdb2dc2c5 100644
> >> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> >> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> >> @@ -5542,6 +5542,18 @@ void __meminit memmap_init_zone(unsigned long size, int nid, unsigned long zone,
> >> cond_resched();
> >> }
> >> }
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> >> + /*
> >> + * If the zone does not span the rest of the section then
> >> + * we should at least initialize those pages. Otherwise we
> >> + * could blow up on a poisoned page in some paths which depend
> >> + * on full sections being initialized (e.g. memory hotplug).
> >> + */
> >> + while (end_pfn % PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
> >> + __init_single_page(pfn_to_page(end_pfn), end_pfn, zone, nid);
> >> + end_pfn++;
> >
> > This page will not be marked as PG_reserved - although it is a physical
> > memory gap. Do we care?
> >
>
> Hm, or do we even have any idea what this is (e.g. could it also be
> something not a gap)?
In the "mem=" restriction scenario it would be a gap, and probably fall
into the PG_reserved categorization from your recent patch:
* - Pages falling into physical memory gaps - not IORESOURCE_SYSRAM. Trying
* to read/write these pages might end badly. Don't touch!
Not sure if it could be something else. In theory, if it is possible to have
a scenario where memory zones are not section-aligned, then this
end_pfn % PAGES_PER_SECTION part could be part of another zone. But then it
should not matter if the pages get pre-initialized here, with or w/o
PG_reseved, because they should later be properly initialized in their zone.
So marking them as PG_reserved sounds right, especially in the light of your
current PG_reserved clean-up.
>
> For physical memory gaps within a section, architectures usually exclude
> that memory from getting passed to e.g. the page allocator by
> memblock_reserve().
>
> Before handing all free pages to the page allocator, all such reserved
> memblocks will be marked reserved.
>
> But this here seems to be different. We don't have a previous
> memblock_reserve(), because otherwise these pages would have properly
> been initialized already when marking them reserved.
Not sure how memblock_reserve() and struct page initialization are
related, but at least on s390 there is a memblock_reserve() on the range
in question in setup_arch() -> reserve_memory_end(). However, in this
"mem=" scenario, the range is also removed later with memblock_remove()
in setup_memory_end(), because it is beyond memory_end.
