linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm/hugetlb: Prepare hugetlb_follow_page_mask() for FOLL

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: <ZItpnQ/lW0kzaCKG@x1n>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2023 15:42:21 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm/hugetlb: Prepare hugetlb_follow_page_mask() for
 FOLL_PIN

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 05:25:25PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 06/14/23 11:51, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 05:47:31PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > Right. Then just call patch #2 "Add missing write-permission check" and this
> > > patch "Support FOLL_PIN in hugetlb_follow_page_mask()" or sth. like that.
> > > 
> > > Regarding the backport, I really wonder if patch #2 is required at all,
> > > because I didn't sport any applicable FOLL_WRITE users. Maybe there were
> > > some? Hm. If it's not applicable, a single "Support FOLL_PIN in
> > > hugetlb_follow_page_mask()" patch might be cleanest.
> > 
> > Yeah, I agree.  The code is definitely needed, not the split of patches if
> > no need for a backport.  Let me merge then.
> > 
> 
> Should have read this before adding my RB to patch 2.  I assumed no
> backport.  Agree, than merging the gup_must_unshare here makes more sense.

Thanks for taking a look!

No worries, I'll make bold to just take your R-b over the merged patch when
I repost, according to your R-b in patch 2 and the comment here.  I hope
it's fine to you.

-- 
Peter Xu