linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 04/14] mm/shmem: Support memfile

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: <a34d88b9-a4b9-cb9e-91d9-c5a89449fcd5@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 5 Aug 2022 15:26:02 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        x86@...nel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
        "Maciej S . Szmigiero" <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
        Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        luto@...nel.org, jun.nakajima@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        ak@...ux.intel.com, aarcange@...hat.com, ddutile@...hat.com,
        dhildenb@...hat.com, Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>, mhocko@...e.com,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/14] mm/shmem: Support memfile_notifier

On 06.07.22 10:20, Chao Peng wrote:
> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> Implement shmem as a memfile_notifier backing store. Essentially it
> interacts with the memfile_notifier feature flags for userspace
> access/page migration/page reclaiming and implements the necessary
> memfile_backing_store callbacks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>
> ---

[...]

> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMFILE_NOTIFIER
> +static struct memfile_node *shmem_lookup_memfile_node(struct file *file)
> +{
> +	struct inode *inode = file_inode(file);
> +
> +	if (!shmem_mapping(inode->i_mapping))
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	return  &SHMEM_I(inode)->memfile_node;
> +}
> +
> +
> +static int shmem_get_pfn(struct file *file, pgoff_t offset, pfn_t *pfn,
> +			 int *order)
> +{
> +	struct page *page;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = shmem_getpage(file_inode(file), offset, &page, SGP_WRITE);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	unlock_page(page);
> +	*pfn = page_to_pfn_t(page);
> +	*order = thp_order(compound_head(page));
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void shmem_put_pfn(pfn_t pfn)
> +{
> +	struct page *page = pfn_t_to_page(pfn);
> +
> +	if (!page)
> +		return;
> +
> +	put_page(page);


Why do we export shmem_get_pfn/shmem_put_pfn and not simply

get_folio()

and let the caller deal with putting the folio? What's the reason to

a) Operate on PFNs and not folios
b) Have these get/put semantics?

> +}
> +
> +static struct memfile_backing_store shmem_backing_store = {
> +	.lookup_memfile_node = shmem_lookup_memfile_node,
> +	.get_pfn = shmem_get_pfn,
> +	.put_pfn = shmem_put_pfn,
> +};
> +#endif /* CONFIG_MEMFILE_NOTIFIER */
> +
>  void __init shmem_init(void)
>  {
>  	int error;
> @@ -3956,6 +4059,10 @@ void __init shmem_init(void)
>  	else
>  		shmem_huge = SHMEM_HUGE_NEVER; /* just in case it was patched */
>  #endif
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMFILE_NOTIFIER
> +	memfile_register_backing_store(&shmem_backing_store);

Can we instead prove a dummy function that does nothing without
CONFIG_MEMFILE_NOTIFIER?

> +#endif
>  	return;
>  
>  out1:


-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb