Hi,
On 21.12.2021 17:20, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:51, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 21.12.2021 14:34, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 12:15, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 21.12.2021 11:44, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 11:39, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> On 22.11.2021 10:28, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>>>> Wire up the generic support for managing task stack allocations via vmalloc,
>>>>>>> and implement the entry code that detects whether we faulted because of a
>>>>>>> stack overrun (or future stack overrun caused by pushing the pt_regs array)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While this adds a fair amount of tricky entry asm code, it should be
>>>>>>> noted that it only adds a TST + branch to the svc_entry path. The code
>>>>>>> implementing the non-trivial handling of the overflow stack is emitted
>>>>>>> out-of-line into the .text section.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since on ARM, we rely on do_translation_fault() to keep PMD level page
>>>>>>> table entries that cover the vmalloc region up to date, we need to
>>>>>>> ensure that we don't hit such a stale PMD entry when accessing the
>>>>>>> stack. So we do a dummy read from the new stack while still running from
>>>>>>> the old one on the context switch path, and bump the vmalloc_seq counter
>>>>>>> when PMD level entries in the vmalloc range are modified, so that the MM
>>>>>>> switch fetches the latest version of the entries.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that we need to increase the per-mode stack by 1 word, to gain some
>>>>>>> space to stash a GPR until we know it is safe to touch the stack.
>>>>>>> However, due to the cacheline alignment of the struct, this does not
>>>>>>> actually increase the memory footprint of the struct stack array at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> Tested-by: Keith Packard <keithpac@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> This patch landed recently in linux-next 20211220 as commit a1c510d0adc6
>>>>>> ("ARM: implement support for vmap'ed stacks"). Sadly it breaks
>>>>>> suspend/resume operation on all ARM 32bit Exynos SoCs. Probably the
>>>>>> suspend/resume related code must be updated somehow (it partially works
>>>>>> on physical addresses and disabled MMU), but I didn't analyze it yet. If
>>>>>> you have any hints, let me know.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Are there any such systems in KernelCI? We caught a suspend/resume
>>>>> related issue in development, which is why the hunk below was added.
>>>> I think that some Exynos-based Odroids (U3 and XU3) were some time ago
>>>> available in KernelCI, but I don't know if they are still there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> In general, any virt-to-phys translation involving and address on the
>>>>> stack will become problematic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you please confirm whether the issue persists with the patch
>>>>> applied but with CONFIG_VMAP_STACK turned off? Just so we know we are
>>>>> looking in the right place?
>>>> I've just checked. After disabling CONFIG_VMAP_STACK suspend/resume
>>>> works fine both on commit a1c510d0adc6 and linux-next 20211220.
>>>>
>>> Thanks. Any other context you can provide beyond 'does not work' ?
>> Well, the board properly suspends, but it doesn't wake then (tested
>> remotely with rtcwake command). So far I cannot provide anything more.
>>
> Thanks. Does the below help? Or otherwise, could you try doubling the
> size of the overflow stack at arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h:34?
I've tried both (but not at the same time) on the current linux-next and
none helped. This must be something else... :/
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
