From: Jinjiang Tu <tujinjiang@huawei.com>
To: <liuyongqiang13@huawei.com>
Cc: <arnd@arndb.de>, <keescook@chromium.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
<m.szyprowski@samsung.com>, <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
<sunnanyong@huawei.com>, <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
<willy@infradead.org>, <yanaijie@huawei.com>,
<zhangxiaoxu5@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm: flush: check if the folio is reserved for no-mapping addresses
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 15:03:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5a1d28b7-1e6e-da39-9b34-f86470163bb1@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240223063608.2605736-1-liuyongqiang13@huawei.com>
Since some abuses of pfn_valid() have been reported, I check all the use
of pfn_valid(), and find some suspicious cases.
phys_mem_access_prot() defined in arch/arm/mm/mmu.c returns
pgprot_noncached() when pfn_valid() returns false.
I think it’s purpose is to return pgprot_noncached() when the pfn is not
in RAM, and the use of pfn_valid() is incorrect.
Notably, phys_mem_access_prot() defined in arm64 uses
pfn_is_map_memory() instead of pfn_valid() since commit
873ba463914c (arm64: decouple check whether pfn is in linear map from
pfn_valid()).
Similarly, virt_addr_valid() defined in arm64 uses pfn_is_map_memory()
instead of pfn_valid() since commit
873ba463914c (arm64: decouple check whether pfn is in linear map from
pfn_valid()), But virt_addr_valid() still
uses pfn_valid(). Besides, the implementation of x86 also uses pfn_valid().
update_mmu_cache_range() defined in arch/arm/mm/fault-armv.c checks
pfn_valid() and then calls __flush_dcache_folio().
This case is similar to the case reported by Yongqiang Liu, the pfn may
not be a RAM pfn, and the system will crash in
__flush_dcache_folio() due to the kernel linear mapping is not
established. virt_addr_valid() is used to check whether a
vrtual address is valid linear mapping. Are these uses of pfn_valid()
incorrect?
pfn_modify_allowed() defined in arch/x86/mm/mmap.c checks pfn_valid(),
and the comment says it is intended to check
whether the pfn is in real memory. So the use of pfn_valid() should be
incorrent. This case is only involved when the cpu
is affected by X86_BUG_L1TF.
try_ram_remap() defined in kernel/iomem.c returns the linear address
when three checks are passed. One of the checks is
pfn_valid(). The only caller memremap() guarantees the pfn passed to
try_ram_remap() is in RAM, but the pfn may be in
NOMAP memory regions and is not mapped in linear mapping. commit
260364d112bc (arm[64]/memremap: don't abuse
pfn_valid() to ensure presence of linear map) solves it by checking in
arch_memremap_can_ram_remap(), However, if other
architectures involve this issue?
Do these suspicious case abuse pfn_valid() really? Thanks
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-26 7:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-23 6:36 [PATCH v2] arm: flush: check if the folio is reserved for no-mapping addresses Yongqiang Liu
2024-02-26 7:03 ` Jinjiang Tu [this message]
[not found] <788c8a64-09ed-96fd-9878-ed126b09c683@huawei.com>
2024-02-26 11:57 ` Russell King (Oracle)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5a1d28b7-1e6e-da39-9b34-f86470163bb1@huawei.com \
--to=tujinjiang@huawei.com \
--cc=20240223063608.2605736-1-liuyongqiang13@huawei.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=liuyongqiang13@huawei.com \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sunnanyong@huawei.com \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yanaijie@huawei.com \
--cc=zhangxiaoxu5@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).