linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/8] hugetlb, rmap: add reverse mapping for hugepage

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]

Message-Id: <20100602111617.0c292178.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:16:17 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] hugetlb, rmap: add reverse mapping for hugepage

On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:29:16 +0900
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com> wrote:

> +#ifdef CONFIG_HUGETLBFS
> +/*
> + * The following three functions are for anonymous (private mapped) hugepages.
> + * Unlike common anonymous pages, anonymous hugepages have no accounting code
> + * and no lru code, because we handle hugepages differently from common pages.
> + */
> +static void __hugepage_set_anon_rmap(struct page *page,
> +	struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address, int exclusive)
> +{
> +	struct anon_vma *anon_vma = vma->anon_vma;
> +	BUG_ON(!anon_vma);
> +	if (!exclusive) {
> +		struct anon_vma_chain *avc;
> +		avc = list_entry(vma->anon_vma_chain.prev,
> +				 struct anon_vma_chain, same_vma);
> +		anon_vma = avc->anon_vma;
> +	}
> +	anon_vma = (void *) anon_vma + PAGE_MAPPING_ANON;
> +	page->mapping = (struct address_space *) anon_vma;
> +	page->index = linear_page_index(vma, address);
> +}
> +
> +void hugepage_add_anon_rmap(struct page *page,
> +			    struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address)
> +{
> +	struct anon_vma *anon_vma = vma->anon_vma;
> +	int first;
> +	BUG_ON(!anon_vma);
> +	BUG_ON(address < vma->vm_start || address >= vma->vm_end);
> +	first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount);
> +	if (first)
> +		__hugepage_set_anon_rmap(page, vma, address, 0);
> +}
> +
> +void hugepage_add_new_anon_rmap(struct page *page,
> +			struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address)
> +{
> +	BUG_ON(address < vma->vm_start || address >= vma->vm_end);
> +	atomic_set(&page->_mapcount, 0);
> +	__hugepage_set_anon_rmap(page, vma, address, 1);
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_HUGETLBFS */

This code still make sense if CONFIG_HUGETLBFS=n, I think?  Should it
instead depend on CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE?

I have a feeling that we make that confusion relatively often.  Perhaps
CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE=y && CONFIG_HUGETLBFS=n makes no sense and we
should unify them...  
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/