mm/memory.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Commit 0cf18e839f64 of large folio zap work broke uffd-wp. Now mm's uffd
unit test "wp-unpopulated" will trigger this WARN_ON_ONCE().
The WARN_ON_ONCE() asserts that an VMA cannot be registered with
userfaultfd-wp if it contains a !normal page, but it's actually possible.
One example is an anonymous vma, register with uffd-wp, read anything will
install a zero page. Then when zap on it, this should trigger.
What's more, removing that WARN_ON_ONCE may not be enough either, because
we should also not rely on "whether it's a normal page" to decide whether
pte marker is needed. For example, one can register wr-protect over some
DAX regions to track writes when UFFD_FEATURE_WP_ASYNC enabled, in which
case it can have page==NULL for a devmap but we may want to keep the marker
around.
Cc: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Fixes: 0cf18e839f64 ("mm/memory: handle !page case in zap_present_pte() separately")
Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
---
mm/memory.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index f2bc6dd15eb8..904f70b99498 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -1536,7 +1536,9 @@ static inline int zap_present_ptes(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
ptep_get_and_clear_full(mm, addr, pte, tlb->fullmm);
arch_check_zapped_pte(vma, ptent);
tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, pte, addr);
- VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(userfaultfd_wp(vma));
+ if (userfaultfd_pte_wp(vma, ptent))
+ zap_install_uffd_wp_if_needed(vma, addr, pte, 1,
+ details, ptent);
ksm_might_unmap_zero_page(mm, ptent);
return 1;
}
--
2.44.0
On 13.03.24 22:31, peterx@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
>
> Commit 0cf18e839f64 of large folio zap work broke uffd-wp. Now mm's uffd
> unit test "wp-unpopulated" will trigger this WARN_ON_ONCE().
Good that I added the WARN_ON_ONCE() :)
>
> The WARN_ON_ONCE() asserts that an VMA cannot be registered with
> userfaultfd-wp if it contains a !normal page, but it's actually possible.
> One example is an anonymous vma, register with uffd-wp, read anything will
> install a zero page. Then when zap on it, this should trigger.
Are you sure? zap_install_uffd_wp_if_needed() contains right at the start:
/* Zap on anonymous always means dropping everything */
if (vma_is_anonymous(vma))
return;
So if that's the case the unit test triggers, I'm confused.
>
> What's more, removing that WARN_ON_ONCE may not be enough either, because
> we should also not rely on "whether it's a normal page" to decide whether
> pte marker is needed. For example, one can register wr-protect over some
> DAX regions to track writes when UFFD_FEATURE_WP_ASYNC enabled, in which
> case it can have page==NULL for a devmap but we may want to keep the marker
> around.
I thought uffd-wp was limited to specific backends only. But looks like
that changed with UFFD_FEATURE_WP_ASYNC, I guess?
Change itself looks, good. Not sure about the anon_vma example above.
Thanks!
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>
> Cc: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> Fixes: 0cf18e839f64 ("mm/memory: handle !page case in zap_present_pte() separately")
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/memory.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> index f2bc6dd15eb8..904f70b99498 100644
> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@ -1536,7 +1536,9 @@ static inline int zap_present_ptes(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
> ptep_get_and_clear_full(mm, addr, pte, tlb->fullmm);
> arch_check_zapped_pte(vma, ptent);
> tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, pte, addr);
> - VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(userfaultfd_wp(vma));
> + if (userfaultfd_pte_wp(vma, ptent))
> + zap_install_uffd_wp_if_needed(vma, addr, pte, 1,
> + details, ptent);
> ksm_might_unmap_zero_page(mm, ptent);
> return 1;
> }
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 11:03:04PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 13.03.24 22:31, peterx@redhat.com wrote: > > From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> > > > > Commit 0cf18e839f64 of large folio zap work broke uffd-wp. Now mm's uffd > > unit test "wp-unpopulated" will trigger this WARN_ON_ONCE(). > > Good that I added the WARN_ON_ONCE() :) To be explict, VM_WARN_ON_ONCE. :) And that's my guess that you didn't hit it when you posted the series and did the tests, as I know latest distros like Fedora dropped DEBUG_VM, so maybe you had your base config out of there (but I normally have it irrelevant of that). > > > > > The WARN_ON_ONCE() asserts that an VMA cannot be registered with > > userfaultfd-wp if it contains a !normal page, but it's actually possible. > > One example is an anonymous vma, register with uffd-wp, read anything will > > install a zero page. Then when zap on it, this should trigger. > > Are you sure? zap_install_uffd_wp_if_needed() contains right at the start: > > /* Zap on anonymous always means dropping everything */ > if (vma_is_anonymous(vma)) > return; My example is not exactly how the test failed, but should be a simpler version of it. To trigger this warning I don't think it requires the zero page to be wr-protected at all or have any pte marker involved. UFFDIO_REGISTER should suffice, afaiu (feel free to read the example above again; there's no mention of ioctl(UFFDIO_WRITEPROTECT)). > > So if that's the case the unit test triggers, I'm confused. > > > > > What's more, removing that WARN_ON_ONCE may not be enough either, because > > we should also not rely on "whether it's a normal page" to decide whether > > pte marker is needed. For example, one can register wr-protect over some > > DAX regions to track writes when UFFD_FEATURE_WP_ASYNC enabled, in which > > case it can have page==NULL for a devmap but we may want to keep the marker > > around. > > I thought uffd-wp was limited to specific backends only. But looks like that > changed with UFFD_FEATURE_WP_ASYNC, I guess? Correct. That was also what the new PAGEMAP ioctl relies on. > > > Change itself looks, good. Not sure about the anon_vma example above. > > Thanks! > > Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Thanks, -- Peter Xu
On 13.03.24 23:26, Peter Xu wrote: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 11:03:04PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 13.03.24 22:31, peterx@redhat.com wrote: >>> From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> >>> >>> Commit 0cf18e839f64 of large folio zap work broke uffd-wp. Now mm's uffd >>> unit test "wp-unpopulated" will trigger this WARN_ON_ONCE(). >> >> Good that I added the WARN_ON_ONCE() :) > > To be explict, VM_WARN_ON_ONCE. :) And that's my guess that you didn't hit > it when you posted the series and did the tests, as I know latest distros > like Fedora dropped DEBUG_VM, so maybe you had your base config out of > there (but I normally have it irrelevant of that). It's rather surprising that this went unnoticed for quite a while. I usually do run with DEBUG_VM, but I have a bunch of different VMs where I tests stuff, likely it was off when I ran the selftests. -- Cheers, David / dhildenb
On 13.03.24 23:03, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 13.03.24 22:31, peterx@redhat.com wrote: >> From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> >> >> Commit 0cf18e839f64 of large folio zap work broke uffd-wp. Now mm's uffd >> unit test "wp-unpopulated" will trigger this WARN_ON_ONCE(). > > Good that I added the WARN_ON_ONCE() :) > >> >> The WARN_ON_ONCE() asserts that an VMA cannot be registered with >> userfaultfd-wp if it contains a !normal page, but it's actually possible. >> One example is an anonymous vma, register with uffd-wp, read anything will >> install a zero page. Then when zap on it, this should trigger. > > Are you sure? zap_install_uffd_wp_if_needed() contains right at the start: > > /* Zap on anonymous always means dropping everything */ > if (vma_is_anonymous(vma)) > return; > > So if that's the case the unit test triggers, I'm confused. Ah, got it. It's not that we have to place a marker, just that it can happen. Of course it can. All makes sense. Thanks! -- Cheers, David / dhildenb
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.