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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:27:54 +0800 From: maobibo <maobibo@...ngson.cn> To: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, muchun.song@...ux.dev, 陈华才 <chenhuacai@...ngson.cn> Cc: chris@...kel.net, jcmvbkbc@...il.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: use update_mmu_tlb() on the second thread 在 2022/9/29 11:07, Qi Zheng 写道: > > > On 2022/9/26 22:34, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 26.09.22 13:56, Qi Zheng wrote: >>> As message in commit 7df676974359 ("mm/memory.c: Update local TLB >>> if PTE entry exists") said, we should update local TLB only on the >>> second thread. So in the do_anonymous_page() here, we should use >>> update_mmu_tlb() instead of update_mmu_cache() on the second thread. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com> >>> Reviewed-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> >>> --- >>> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220924053239.91661-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com/ >>> >>> Changelog in v1 -> v2: >>> - change the subject and commit message (David) >>> >>> mm/memory.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c >>> index 118e5f023597..9e11c783ba0e 100644 >>> --- a/mm/memory.c >>> +++ b/mm/memory.c >>> @@ -4122,7 +4122,7 @@ static vm_fault_t do_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf) >>> vmf->pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address, >>> &vmf->ptl); >>> if (!pte_none(*vmf->pte)) { >>> - update_mmu_cache(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pte); >>> + update_mmu_tlb(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pte); >>> goto release; >>> } >> >> >> Staring at 7df676974359, it indeed looks like an accidental use [nothing else in that patch uses update_mmu_cache]. >> >> So it looks good to me, but a confirmation from Bibo Mao might be good. > > Thanks, and Hi Bibo, any comments here? :) update_mmu_tlb is defined as empty on loongarch, maybe some lines should be added in file arch/loongarch/include/asm/pgtable.h like this: +#define __HAVE_ARCH_UPDATE_MMU_TLB +#define update_mmu_tlb update_mmu_cache regards bibo mao > >> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists