linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm, trivial: Simplify swap related code in try_to_unmap

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: <87tv24j9hq.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 01 Apr 2020 09:11:13 +0800
From:   "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        "Hugh Dickins" <hughd@...gle.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, trivial: Simplify swap related code in try_to_unmap_one()

Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> writes:

> On Tue 31-03-20 16:46:13, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
>> 
>> Because PageSwapCache() will always return false if PageSwapBacked() returns
>> false, and PageSwapBacked() will be check for MADV_FREE pages in
>> try_to_unmap_one().  The swap related code in try_to_unmap_one() can be
>> simplified to improve the readability.
>
> My understanding is that this is a sanity check to let us know if
> something breaks. Do we really want to get rid of it? Maybe it is not
> really useful but if that is the case then the changelog should reflect
> this fact.

Now the definition of PageSwapCache() is,

static __always_inline int PageSwapCache(struct page *page)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_THP_SWAP
	page = compound_head(page);
#endif
	return PageSwapBacked(page) && test_bit(PG_swapcache, &page->flags);
}

So, if PageSwapBacked() returns false, PageSwapCache() will always
return false.  The original checking,

-			if (unlikely(PageSwapBacked(page) != PageSwapCache(page))) {

is equivalent to

-			if (unlikely(PageSwapBacked(page) && !PageSwapCache(page))) {

Then what is the check !PageSwapBacked() && PageSwapCache() for?  To
prevent someone to change the definition of PageSwapCache() in the
future to break this?

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying