Re: [PATCH RFC 09/11] misc/sgi-gru: use ptep_get() for page-table reads
"David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <[email protected]> Wed, 29 Jul 2026 14:42:30 +0200
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-arch,dev.linux.lists.damon,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-parisc,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.xenproject.lists.xen-devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 7/29/26 14:36, Pedro Falcato wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 05:47:00PM +0100, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: >> A leaf PMD is being read through ptep_get() by treating the PMD address >> as PTE-sized table storage. ptep_get() now accepts hw_pte_t *, so update >> the cast accordingly. >> >> pte_offset_kernel() also returns hw_pte_t *. Get pte_t value by calling >> ptep_get(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <[email protected]> >> --- >> drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufault.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufault.c b/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufault.c >> index 3557d78ee47a2..ff89d34ad2aa4 100644 >> --- a/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufault.c >> +++ b/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufault.c >> @@ -228,10 +228,10 @@ static int atomic_pte_lookup(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long vaddr, >> goto err; >> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 >> if (unlikely(pmd_leaf(*pmdp))) >> - pte = ptep_get((pte_t *)pmdp); >> + pte = ptep_get((hw_pte_t *)pmdp); >> else >> #endif >> - pte = *pte_offset_kernel(pmdp, vaddr); >> + pte = ptep_get(pte_offset_kernel(pmdp, vaddr)); >> >> if (unlikely(!pte_present(pte) || >> (write && (!pte_write(pte) || !pte_dirty(pte))))) > > This code is super, super broken. Can we remove this ASAP? For starters, > we're using is_vm_hugetlb_page() to detect page shift, the code does not > grab refs on the pages, uses pte_offset_kernel() on user page tables, > does not handle PUD-level hugepages, does not handle PMD-level hugepages on !x86_64, > does not hold page table locks nor check for pte table retraction, etc > > I don't think I need to go on. > Heh, when Usama first showed me an early diffstat I was like "what the hell are drivers doing with page tables here, they shouldn't be doing that". atomic_pte_lookup documents: "Only supports Intel large pages (2MB only) on x86_64. ZZZ - hugepage support is incomplete" What is this crap? :) -- Cheers, David