[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: preempt bug in set_pmd_pfn?
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> actually, i think the correct approach is to remove the TLB flushing and
> perhaps to check that the old pte is not present. Do we ever _change_
> mappings via __set_fixmap()? I think we only ever install them.

Yes, I think that's the case. clear_fixmap() exists for clearing out an
existing mapping, but its only used to clear out the WP test mapping and
in early_iounmap (if called late). I couldn't see any instances of
replacing a mapping.

> but if we ever change them somewhere then the correct approach is to do
> a flush_tlb_all(). It's not just about preemption but about the fact
> that we modified the kernel address space and we must propagate that to
> all CPUs.

Yes, I was wondering about that. If __set_fixmap is only used at boot
time, then a global flush isn't necessary, but if its deemed a
general-purpose API in a normal running kernel, it needs to deal with
cross-cpu flushes.

64-bit set_fixmap is __init only, and I'd be OK with that. The only
non-__init use in the 32-bit kernel is the compat vdso mapping, and that
could easily be done by other means (though it would effectively become
an opencoded set_fixmap, so perhaps that's not a good idea...).

> the vmalloc() backtrace you sent - how did set_pte_pfn() get into that
> codepath - vmalloc shouldnt be using __set_fixmap().

No, that's set_pte_at(), which is the real issue in both cases.
__set_fixmap calls both set_pte_at and flush_tlb_one, which is why it
gets two backtrackes.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-06 19:27    [W:0.077 / U:4.772 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site