| Message ID | 20240123064305.2829244-1-surenb@google.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | e870920bbe68e52335a4c31a059e6af6a9a59dbb |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/1] arch/arm/mm: fix major fault accounting when retrying under per-VMA lock | expand |
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:43:05 -0800 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote: > The change [1] missed ARM architecture when fixing major fault accounting > for page fault retry under per-VMA lock. Add missing code to fix ARM > architecture fault accounting. > > [1] 46e714c729c8 ("arch/mm/fault: fix major fault accounting when retrying under per-VMA lock") > > Fixes: 12214eba1992 ("mm: handle read faults under the VMA lock") What are the userspace-visible runtime effects of this change? Is a cc:stable backport desirable? > Reported-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 6:04 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:43:05 -0800 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote: > > > The change [1] missed ARM architecture when fixing major fault accounting > > for page fault retry under per-VMA lock. Add missing code to fix ARM > > architecture fault accounting. > > > > [1] 46e714c729c8 ("arch/mm/fault: fix major fault accounting when retrying under per-VMA lock") > > > > Fixes: 12214eba1992 ("mm: handle read faults under the VMA lock") > > What are the userspace-visible runtime effects of this change? The user-visible effects is that it restores correct major fault accounting that was broken after [2] was merged in 6.7 kernel. The more detailed description is in [3] and this patch simply adds the same fix to ARM architecture which I missed in [3]. I can re-send the patch with the full description from [3] if needed. > > Is a cc:stable backport desirable? Yes, I guess since [2] was merged in 6.7, cc-ing stable would be desirable. Please let me know if you want me to re-send the patch with full description and CC'ing stable. [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231006195318.4087158-6-willy@infradead.org/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231226214610.109282-1-surenb@google.com/ > > > Reported-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk> > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Hello: This patch was applied to riscv/linux.git (fixes) by Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>: On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 22:43:05 -0800 you wrote: > The change [1] missed ARM architecture when fixing major fault accounting > for page fault retry under per-VMA lock. Add missing code to fix ARM > architecture fault accounting. > > [1] 46e714c729c8 ("arch/mm/fault: fix major fault accounting when retrying under per-VMA lock") > > Fixes: 12214eba1992 ("mm: handle read faults under the VMA lock") > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - [1/1] arch/arm/mm: fix major fault accounting when retrying under per-VMA lock https://git.kernel.org/riscv/c/e870920bbe68 You are awesome, thank you!
diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm/mm/fault.c index e96fb40b9cc3..07565b593ed6 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/arm/mm/fault.c @@ -298,6 +298,8 @@ do_page_fault(unsigned long addr, unsigned int fsr, struct pt_regs *regs) goto done; } count_vm_vma_lock_event(VMA_LOCK_RETRY); + if (fault & VM_FAULT_MAJOR) + flags |= FAULT_FLAG_TRIED; /* Quick path to respond to signals */ if (fault_signal_pending(fault, regs)) {
The change [1] missed ARM architecture when fixing major fault accounting for page fault retry under per-VMA lock. Add missing code to fix ARM architecture fault accounting. [1] 46e714c729c8 ("arch/mm/fault: fix major fault accounting when retrying under per-VMA lock") Fixes: 12214eba1992 ("mm: handle read faults under the VMA lock") Reported-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> --- arch/arm/mm/fault.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)