On 07/02/2025 08:41, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 2/5/25 20:39, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> A call to vmalloc_huge() may cause memory blocks to be mapped at pmd or
>> pud level. But it is possible to subsquently call vunmap_range() on a
>
> s/subsquently/subsequently
>
>> sub-range of the mapped memory, which partially overlaps a pmd or pud.
>> In this case, vmalloc unmaps the entire pmd or pud so that the
>> no-overlapping portion is also unmapped. Clearly that would have a bad
>> outcome, but it's not something that any callers do today as far as I
>> can tell. So I guess it's jsut expected that callers will not do this.
>
> s/jsut/just
>
>>
>> However, it would be useful to know if this happened in future; let's
>> add a warning to cover the eventuality.
>
> This is a reasonable check to prevent bad outcomes later.
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> mm/vmalloc.c | 8 ++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
>> index a6e7acebe9ad..fcdf67d5177a 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
>> @@ -374,8 +374,10 @@ static void vunmap_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>> if (cleared || pmd_bad(*pmd))
>> *mask |= PGTBL_PMD_MODIFIED;
>>
>> - if (cleared)
>> + if (cleared) {
>> + WARN_ON(next - addr < PMD_SIZE);
>> continue;
>> + }
>> if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd))
>> continue;
>> vunmap_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, mask);
>> @@ -399,8 +401,10 @@ static void vunmap_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>> if (cleared || pud_bad(*pud))
>> *mask |= PGTBL_PUD_MODIFIED;
>>
>> - if (cleared)
>> + if (cleared) {
>> + WARN_ON(next - addr < PUD_SIZE);
>> continue;
>> + }
>> if (pud_none_or_clear_bad(pud))
>> continue;
>> vunmap_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, mask);
> Why not also include such checks in vunmap_p4d_range() and __vunmap_range_noflush()
> for corresponding P4D and PGD levels as well ?
The kernel does not support p4d or pgd leaf entries so there is nothing to check.
Although vunmap_p4d_range() does call p4d_clear_huge(). The function is a stub
and returns void (unlike p[mu]d_clear_huge()). I suspect we could just remove
p4d_clear_huge() entirely. But that would be a separate patch to mm tree I think.
For pgd, there isn't even an equivalent looking function.
Basically at those 2 levels, it's always a table.
Thanks,
Ryan
