On 2022/2/15 16:37, HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:40:02AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> On 2022/2/14 22:48, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 10:17:27PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>>>> It's unnecessary to walk the page table when vma_address() return -EFAULT.
>>>> Return early if so to save some cpu cycles.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@xxxxxxx>
>>
>> Many thanks for your review and Acked-by tag!
>
> You're welcome :)
>
>>
>>>
>>> Does this patch fix the real problem rather than just saving cpu cycles?
>>> Without this patch, "address == -EFAULT" seems to make pgd_offset() return
>>> invalid pointer and result in some serious result like general protection fault.
>>
>> I think you're right. We might dereference the invalid pointer in the following pagetable
>> walk and results in general protection fault.
>>
>>> If that's the case, this patch might be worth sending to stable.
>>
>> But I'am not sure vma_address will return -EFAULT for dax pages in the real workload?
>> If so, I will send a v2 with Fixes tag.
>
> Hm, actually I'm not sure either. But dev_pagemap_mapping_shift() is called only
> when vma associated to the error page is found already in collect_procs_{file,anon},
> so vma_address() should not return -EFAULT except with some bug.
> So VM_BUG_ON() might be more suitable?
Agree. anon_vma_interval_tree_foreach/vma_interval_tree_foreach in collect_procs_{file,anon} should
have guaranteed the validity of the vma_address(). And rmap_walk_anon and rmap_walk_file do the
VM_BUG_ON_VMA(address == -EFAULT, vma). So VM_BUG_ON() might be really more suitable. Will do this
in v2.
Many thanks.
>
> Thanks,
> Naoya Horiguchi
>
