linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/15] mm: remove the pgmap field from struct hmm_vma

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:21:41 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org" <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] mm: remove the pgmap field from struct hmm_vma_walk

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 5:24 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 08:54:46PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>
> > > However, this means we cannot do any processing of ZONE_DEVICE pages
> > > outside the driver lock, so eg, doing any DMA map that might rely on
> > > MEMORY_DEVICE_PCI_P2PDMA has to be done in the driver lock, which is
> > > a bit unfortunate.
> >
> > Wouldn't P2PDMA use page pins? Not needing to hold a lock over
> > ZONE_DEVICE page operations was one of the motivations for plumbing
> > get_dev_pagemap() with a percpu-ref.
>
> hmm_range_fault() doesn't use page pins at all, so if a ZONE_DEVICE
> page comes out of it then it needs to use another locking pattern.
>
> If I follow it all right:
>
> We can do a get_dev_pagemap inside the page_walk and touch the pgmap,
> or we can do the 'device mutex && retry' pattern and touch the pgmap
> in the driver, under that lock.
>
> However in all cases the current get_dev_pagemap()'s in the page walk
> are not necessary, and we can delete them.

Yes, as long as 'struct page' instances resulting from that lookup are
not passed outside of that lock.