On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 13:03, Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 03:58:06PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Anybody else have any opinions? > > Maybe we just shouldn't allow move_normal_pmd() if ranges overlap? > > Other option: pass 'overlaps' down to move_normal_pmd() and only WARN() if > see establised PMD without overlaps being true. > > Untested patch: This patch applied on top of Linus mainline tree and tested on i386. The reported warning did not happen while testing LTP mm [1]. > > diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c > index 5dd572d57ca9..e33fcee541fe 100644 > --- a/mm/mremap.c > +++ b/mm/mremap.c > @@ -245,6 +245,18 @@ unsigned long move_page_tables(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > unsigned long extent, next, old_end; > struct mmu_notifier_range range; > pmd_t *old_pmd, *new_pmd; > + bool overlaps; > + > + /* > + * shift_arg_pages() can call move_page_tables() on overlapping ranges. > + * In this case we cannot use move_normal_pmd() because destination pmd > + * might be established page table: move_ptes() doesn't free page > + * table. > + */ > + if (old_addr > new_addr) > + overlaps = old_addr - new_addr < len; > + else > + overlaps = new_addr - old_addr < len; > > old_end = old_addr + len; > flush_cache_range(vma, old_addr, old_end); > @@ -282,7 +294,7 @@ unsigned long move_page_tables(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > split_huge_pmd(vma, old_pmd, old_addr); > if (pmd_trans_unstable(old_pmd)) > continue; > - } else if (extent == PMD_SIZE) { > + } else if (!overlaps && extent == PMD_SIZE) { > #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MOVE_PMD > /* > * If the extent is PMD-sized, try to speed the move by > -- > Kirill A. Shutemov ref: https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1561734#L1598 - Naresh