linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 12/47] hugetlb: add hugetlb_hgm_walk and hugetlb_walk

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:   Wed, 4 Jan 2023 16:57:10 -0800
From:   Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
To:     James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
        Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
        Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@...gle.com>,
        Manish Mishra <manish.mishra@...anix.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>,
        "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 12/47] hugetlb: add hugetlb_hgm_walk and
 hugetlb_walk_step

> + * @stop_at_none determines what we do when we encounter an empty PTE. If true,
> + * we return that PTE. If false and @sz is less than the current PTE's size,
> + * we make that PTE point to the next level down, going until @sz is the same
> + * as our current PTE.
[..]
> +int hugetlb_hgm_walk(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> +		     struct hugetlb_pte *hpte, unsigned long addr,
> +		     unsigned long sz, bool stop_at_none)
> +{
[..]
> +	while (hugetlb_pte_size(hpte) > sz && !ret) {
> +		pte = huge_ptep_get(hpte->ptep);
> +		if (!pte_present(pte)) {
> +			if (stop_at_none)
> +				return 0;
> +			if (unlikely(!huge_pte_none(pte)))
> +				return -EEXIST;

If 'stop_at_none' means settling down on the just encountered empty PTE,
should the above two "if" clauses switch order?  I thought Peter has
raised this question too, but I'm not seeing a response.

Regards,
-jane


> +		} else if (hugetlb_pte_present_leaf(hpte, pte))
> +			return 0;
> +		ret = hugetlb_walk_step(mm, hpte, addr, sz);
> +	}
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +