linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/25] mm: Introduce struct folio

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:   Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:22:49 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/25] mm: Introduce struct folio

On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 03:26:11PM -0500, Zi Yan wrote:
> > +static inline struct folio *next_folio(struct folio *folio)
> > +{
> > +	return folio + folio_nr_pages(folio);
> 
> Are you planning to make hugetlb use folio too?
> 
> If yes, this might not work if we have CONFIG_SPARSEMEM && !CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
> with a hugetlb folio > MAX_ORDER, because struct page might not be virtually contiguous.
> See the experiment I did in [1].

Actually, how about proofing this against a future change?

static inline struct folio *next_folio(struct folio *folio)
{
#if defined(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM) && !defined(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP)
	pfn_t next_pfn = page_to_pfn(&folio->page) + folio_nr_pages(folio);
	return (struct folio *)pfn_to_page(next_pfn);
#else
	return folio + folio_nr_pages(folio);
#endif
}

(not compiled)