Le 16/04/2021 à 12:51, Steven Price a écrit :

On 16/04/2021 11:38, Christophe Leroy wrote:

quoted

Le 16/04/2021 à 11:28, Steven Price a écrit :

quoted

On 15/04/2021 18:18, Christophe Leroy wrote:

To be honest I don't fully understand why powerpc requires the page_size - it appears to be using 
it purely to find "holes" in the calls to note_page(), but I haven't worked out why such holes 
would occur.

I was indeed introduced for KASAN. We have a first commit 
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/cabe8138 which uses page size to detect whether it is a 
KASAN like stuff.

Then came https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b00ff6d8c as a fix. I can't remember what the 
problem was exactly, something around the use of hugepages for kernel memory, came as part of the 
series 
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/cover/cover.1589866984.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu/ 

Ah, that's useful context. So it looks like powerpc took a different route to reducing the KASAN 
output to x86.

Given the generic ptdump code has handling for KASAN already it should be possible to drop that from 
the powerpc arch code, which I think means we don't actually need to provide page size to 
notepage(). Hopefully that means more code to delete ;)

Looking at how the generic ptdump code handles KASAN, I'm a bit sceptic.

IIUC, it is checking that kasan_early_shadow_pte is in the same page as the pgtable referred by the 
PMD entry. But what happens if that PMD entry is referring another pgtable which is inside the same 
page as kasan_early_shadow_pte ?

Shouldn't the test be

	if (pmd_page_vaddr(val) == lm_alias(kasan_early_shadow_pte))
		return note_kasan_page_table(walk, addr);


Christophe