Excerpts from Daniel Axtens's message of November 26, 2021 4:09 pm: > Hi, > >> pmd_huge is defined out to false when HUGETLB_PAGE is not configured, >> but the vmap code still installs huge PMDs. This leads to errors >> encountering bad PMDs when vunmapping because it is not seen as a >> huge PTE, and the bad PMD check catches it. The end result may not >> be much more serious than some bad pmd warning messages, because the >> pmd_none_or_clear_bad() does what we wanted and clears the huge PTE >> anyway. > > Huh. So vmap seems to key off arch_vmap_p?d_supported which checks for > radix and HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_VMAP. > >> Fix this by checking pmd_is_leaf(), which checks for a PTE regardless >> of config options. The whole huge/large/leaf stuff is a tangled mess >> but that's kernel-wide and not something we can improve much in >> arch/powerpc code. > > I guess I'm a bit late to the party here because p?d_is_leaf was added > in 2019 in commit d6eacedd1f0e ("powerpc/book3s: Use config independent > helpers for page table walk") but why wouldn't we just make pmd_huge() > not config dependent?
I guess so it constant folds code if hugetlbfs is not configured (and maybe so !huge kernels would correctly print a bad PMD warning if they got huge PMD in user mappings). > > Also, looking at that commit, there are a few places that might still > throw warnings, e.g. find_linux_pte, find_current_mm_pte, pud_page which > seem like they might still throw warnings if they were to encounter a > huge vmap page: > > struct page *pud_page(pud_t pud) > { > if (pud_is_leaf(pud)) { > VM_WARN_ON(!pud_huge(pud)); Oh, hmm. That is used in vmalloc.c so maybe that warning should be removed as a false positive. Good catch. > Do these functions need special treatment for huge vmappings()? find_linux_pte etc could be called for vmaps. I'm not sure I see a problem in that function. Thanks, Nick > > Apart from those questions, the patch itself makes sense to me and I can > follow how it would fix a problem. > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Axtens <d...@axtens.net> > > Kind regards, > Daniel >