[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y6TmVtE0gYqWStez@monkey>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:20:54 -0800
From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm/hugetlb: fix uffd-wp handling for migration
entries in hugetlb_change_protection()
On 12/22/22 21:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> We have to update the uffd-wp SWP PTE bit independent of the type of
> migration entry. Currently, if we're unlucky and we want to install/clear
> the uffd-wp bit just while we're migrating a read-only mapped hugetlb page,
> we would miss to set/clear the uffd-wp bit.
>
> Further, if we're processing a readable-exclusive
> migration entry and neither want to set or clear the uffd-wp bit, we
> could currently end up losing the uffd-wp bit. Note that the same would
> hold for writable migrating entries, however, having a writable
> migration entry with the uffd-wp bit set would already mean that
> something went wrong.
>
> Note that the change from !is_readable_migration_entry ->
> writable_migration_entry is harmless and actually cleaner, as raised by
> Miaohe Lin and discussed in [1].
>
> [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/90dd6a93-4500-e0de-2bf0-bf522c311b0c@huawei.com
>
> Fixes: 60dfaad65aa9 ("mm/hugetlb: allow uffd wr-protect none ptes")
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> ---
> mm/hugetlb.c | 17 +++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Thanks,
Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
--
Mike Kravetz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists