[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <568C0BF2-28B9-438C-93D2-19130FAA3364@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 14:32:31 -0700
From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/hugetlb: Fix race condition of uffd missing/minor
handling
On Oct 3, 2022, at 2:16 PM, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 02:00:36PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> On Oct 3, 2022, at 8:56 AM, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> + */
>>> + if (hugetlb_pte_stable(h, mm, ptep, old_pte))
>>> + ret = hugetlb_handle_userfault(
>>> + vma, mapping, idx, flags, haddr,
>>> + address, VM_UFFD_MISSING);
>>> + else
>>> + /* Retry the fault */
>>> + ret = 0;
>>
>> Might be unrelated, but at least for the sake of consistency if not
>> potential GUP issues, don’t you want to return VM_FAULT_RETRY ?
>
> VM_FAULT_RETRY implies releasing of mmap sem, while we didn't?
Of course. My bad.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists