linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] mm: replace FAULT_FLAG_SIZE with parameter to huge

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:00:49 -0800
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
Cc:     kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kbuild-all@...org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        "linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
        linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: replace FAULT_FLAG_SIZE with parameter to huge_fault

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com> wrote:
>> On 02/03/2017 03:56 PM, kbuild test robot wrote:
>>> Hi Dave,
>>>
>>> [auto build test ERROR on mmotm/master]
>>> [cannot apply to linus/master linux/master v4.10-rc6 next-20170203]
>>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system]
>>
>> This one is a bit odd. I just pulled mmotm tree master branch and built
>> with the attached .config and it passed for me (and I don't see this
>> commit in the master branch). I also built linux-next with this patch on
>> top and it also passes with attached .config. Looking at the err log
>> below it seems the code has a mix of partial from before and after the
>> patch. I'm rather confused about it....
>
> This is a false positive. It tried to build it against latest mainline
> instead of linux-next.

On second look it seems I ended up with a duplicate
ext4_huge_dax_fault after "git am" when I apply this on top of
next-20170202.  The following fixes it up for me and tests fine:

diff --git a/fs/ext4/file.c b/fs/ext4/file.c
index f8f4f6d068e5..e8ab46efc4f9 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/file.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/file.c
@@ -276,27 +276,6 @@ static int ext4_dax_huge_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf,
        return result;
 }

-static int
-ext4_dax_huge_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
-{
-       int result;
-       struct inode *inode = file_inode(vmf->vma->vm_file);
-       struct super_block *sb = inode->i_sb;
-       bool write = vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE;
-
-       if (write) {
-               sb_start_pagefault(sb);
-               file_update_time(vmf->vma->vm_file);
-       }
-       down_read(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
-       result = dax_iomap_fault(vmf, &ext4_iomap_ops);
-       up_read(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
-       if (write)
-               sb_end_pagefault(sb);
-
-       return result;
-}
-
 static int ext4_dax_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
 {
        return ext4_dax_huge_fault(vmf, PE_SIZE_PTE);