On 11.05.22 14:04, Baolin Wang wrote: > On some architectures (like ARM64), it can support CONT-PTE/PMD size > hugetlb, which means it can support not only PMD/PUD size hugetlb: > 2M and 1G, but also CONT-PTE/PMD size: 64K and 32M if a 4K page > size specified. > > When migrating a hugetlb page, we will get the relevant page table > entry by huge_pte_offset() only once to nuke it and remap it with > a migration pte entry. This is correct for PMD or PUD size hugetlb, > since they always contain only one pmd entry or pud entry in the > page table. > > However this is incorrect for CONT-PTE and CONT-PMD size hugetlb, > since they can contain several continuous pte or pmd entry with > same page table attributes. So we will nuke or remap only one pte > or pmd entry for this CONT-PTE/PMD size hugetlb page, which is > not expected for hugetlb migration. The problem is we can still > continue to modify the subpages' data of a hugetlb page during > migrating a hugetlb page, which can cause a serious data consistent > issue, since we did not nuke the page table entry and set a > migration pte for the subpages of a hugetlb page. > > To fix this issue, we should change to use huge_ptep_clear_flush() > to nuke a hugetlb page table, and remap it with set_huge_pte_at() > and set_huge_swap_pte_at() when migrating a hugetlb page, which > already considered the CONT-PTE or CONT-PMD size hugetlb. > > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx> Makes sense to me. Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
