linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/shmem: make find_get_pages

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: <A7BE64E0-8F88-46AC-A330-E1AB23A50073@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 04:43:57 -0700
From:   William Kucharski <william.kucharski@...cle.com>
To:     Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/shmem: make find_get_pages_range() work for huge page



> On Jan 9, 2019, at 8:08 PM, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com> wrote:
> 
> find_get_pages_range() and find_get_pages_range_tag() already
> correctly increment reference count on head when seeing compound
> page, but they may still use page index from tail. Page index
> from tail is always zero, so these functions don't work on huge
> shmem. This hasn't been a problem because, AFAIK, nobody calls
> these functions on (huge) shmem. Fix them anyway just in case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
> ---
> mm/filemap.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 81adec8ee02c..cf5fd773314a 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -1704,7 +1704,7 @@ unsigned find_get_pages_range(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t *start,
> 
> 		pages[ret] = page;
> 		if (++ret == nr_pages) {
> -			*start = page->index + 1;
> +			*start = xas.xa_index + 1;
> 			goto out;
> 		}
> 		continue;
> @@ -1850,7 +1850,7 @@ unsigned find_get_pages_range_tag(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t *index,
> 
> 		pages[ret] = page;
> 		if (++ret == nr_pages) {
> -			*index = page->index + 1;
> +			*index = xas.xa_index + 1;
> 			goto out;
> 		}
> 		continue;
> -- 

While this works, it seems like this would be more readable for future maintainers were it to
instead squirrel away the value for *start/*index when ret was zero on the first iteration through
the loop.

Though xa_index is designed to hold the first index of the entry, it seems inappropriate to have
these routines deference elements of xas directly; I guess it depends on how opaque we want to keep
xas and struct xa_state.

Does anyone else have a feeling one way or the other? I could be persuaded either way.