linux-kernel - Re: [patch V2 00/18] mm/highmem: Preemptible variant of kmap

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, 30 Oct 2020 15:46:26 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Paul McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
        "open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>, linux-csky@...r.kernel.org,
        Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, Nick Hu <nickhu@...estech.com>,
        Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>,
        Vincent Chen <deanbo422@...il.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-sparc <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
        Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
        linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 00/18] mm/highmem: Preemptible variant of kmap_atomic & friends

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 3:26 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> While at it I might have a look at that debug request from Willy in the
> other end of this thread. Any comment on that?
>
>  https://lore.kernel.org/r/87k0v7mrrd.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de

I do think that it would be nice to have a debug mode, particularly
since over the last few years we've really lost a lot of HIGHMEM
coverage (to the point that I've wondered how worthwhile it really is
to support at all any more - I think it's Arnd who argued that it's
mainly some embedded ARM variants that will want it for the forseeable
future).

So I'm honestly somewhat torn. I think HIGHMEM is dying, and yes that
argues for "non-HIGHMEM had better have some debug coverage", but at
the same time I think it doesn't even really matter any more. At some
point those embedded ARM platforms just aren't even interesting - they
might as well use older kernels if they are the only thing really
arguing for HIGHMEM at all.

This is one reason why I'd like the new kmap_local() to be a no-op,
and I'd prefer for it to have no other side effects - because I want
to be ready to remove it entirely some day. And if we end up having
some transition where people start rewriting "kmap_atomic()" to be
"kmap_local() + explicit preemption disable", then I think that would
be a good step on that whole "kmap will eventually go away" path.

But I do *not* believe that we need to add _so_ much debug support
that we'd catch Willy's "more than one page" case. And I absolutely do
not believe for a second that we should start caring about compound
pages. NO. kmap() is almost dead already, we're not making it worse.

To me, your patch series has two big advantages:

 - more common code

 - kmap_local() becomes more of a no-op

and the last thing we want is to expand on kmap.

           Linus