[Bug 216183] [bisected] Kernel 5.19-rc4 boots ok with CONFIG_PPC_RADIX_MMU=y but fails to boot with CONFIG_PPC_HASH_MMU_NATIVE=y
bugzilla-daemon at kernel.org
bugzilla-daemon at kernel.org
Thu Jul 14 22:57:21 AEST 2022
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216183
--- Comment #8 from Erhard F. (erhard_f at mailbox.org) ---
Created attachment 301425
--> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=301425&action=edit
bisect.log
Successfully did a bisect which revealed this commit:
# git bisect good
a008f8f9fd67ffb13d906ef4ea6235a3d62dfdb6 is the first bad commit
commit a008f8f9fd67ffb13d906ef4ea6235a3d62dfdb6
Author: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com>
Date: Sat Jan 30 23:08:41 2021 +1000
powerpc/64s/hash: improve context tracking of hash faults
This moves the 64s/hash context tracking from hash_page_mm() to
__do_hash_fault(), so it's no longer called by OCXL / SPU
accelerators, which was certainly the wrong thing to be doing,
because those callers are not low level interrupt handlers, so
should have entered a kernel context tracking already.
Then remain in kernel context for the duration of the fault,
rather than enter/exit for the hash fault then enter/exit for
the page fault, which is pointless.
Even still, calling exception_enter/exit in __do_hash_fault seems
questionable because that's touching per-cpu variables, tracing,
etc., which might have been interrupted by this hash fault or
themselves cause hash faults. But maybe I miss something because
hash_page_mm very deliberately calls trace_hash_fault too, for
example. So for now go with it, it's no worse than before, in this
regard.
Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe at ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210130130852.2952424-32-npiggin@gmail.com
arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h | 1 +
arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/hash_utils.c | 7 ++++---
arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
--
You may reply to this email to add a comment.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list