linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "page cache: fix page_cache_next/prev

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <bf744801-96a1-bdf1-79b5-5e8a21c05be3@tmb.nu>
Date:   Mon, 24 Jul 2023 12:15:17 +0000
From:   Thomas Backlund <tmb@....nu>
To:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@...gle.com>,
        Sidhartha Kumar <sidhartha.kumar@...cle.com>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
        Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "page cache: fix page_cache_next/prev_miss off by one"

Den 2023-06-22 kl. 00:24, skrev Mike Kravetz:
> This reverts commit 9425c591e06a9ab27a145ba655fb50532cf0bcc9
> 
> The reverted commit fixed up routines primarily used by readahead code
> such that they could also be used by hugetlb.  Unfortunately, this
> caused a performance regression as pointed out by the Closes: tag.
> 
> The hugetlb code which uses page_cache_next_miss will be addressed in
> a subsequent patch.
> 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202306211346.1e9ff03e-oliver.sang@intel.com
> Fixes: 9425c591e06a ("page cache: fix page_cache_next/prev_miss off by one")
> Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>


Should not this one be submitted to 6.4 stable branch too ?


git describe --contains 9425c591e06a
v6.4-rc7~29^2~1

The other one (hugetlb: revert use of page_cache_next_miss()) of this 
patch series landed in 6.4.2

Or am I missing something ?

--
Thomas

> ---
>   mm/filemap.c | 26 ++++++++++----------------
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 3b73101f9f86..9e44a49bbd74 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -1728,9 +1728,7 @@ bool __folio_lock_or_retry(struct folio *folio, struct mm_struct *mm,
>    *
>    * Return: The index of the gap if found, otherwise an index outside the
>    * range specified (in which case 'return - index >= max_scan' will be true).
> - * In the rare case of index wrap-around, 0 will be returned.  0 will also
> - * be returned if index == 0 and there is a gap at the index.  We can not
> - * wrap-around if passed index == 0.
> + * In the rare case of index wrap-around, 0 will be returned.
>    */
>   pgoff_t page_cache_next_miss(struct address_space *mapping,
>   			     pgoff_t index, unsigned long max_scan)
> @@ -1740,13 +1738,12 @@ pgoff_t page_cache_next_miss(struct address_space *mapping,
>   	while (max_scan--) {
>   		void *entry = xas_next(&xas);
>   		if (!entry || xa_is_value(entry))
> -			return xas.xa_index;
> -		if (xas.xa_index == 0 && index != 0)
> -			return xas.xa_index;
> +			break;
> +		if (xas.xa_index == 0)
> +			break;
>   	}
>   
> -	/* No gaps in range and no wrap-around, return index beyond range */
> -	return xas.xa_index + 1;
> +	return xas.xa_index;
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_cache_next_miss);
>   
> @@ -1767,9 +1764,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_cache_next_miss);
>    *
>    * Return: The index of the gap if found, otherwise an index outside the
>    * range specified (in which case 'index - return >= max_scan' will be true).
> - * In the rare case of wrap-around, ULONG_MAX will be returned.  ULONG_MAX
> - * will also be returned if index == ULONG_MAX and there is a gap at the
> - * index.  We can not wrap-around if passed index == ULONG_MAX.
> + * In the rare case of wrap-around, ULONG_MAX will be returned.
>    */
>   pgoff_t page_cache_prev_miss(struct address_space *mapping,
>   			     pgoff_t index, unsigned long max_scan)
> @@ -1779,13 +1774,12 @@ pgoff_t page_cache_prev_miss(struct address_space *mapping,
>   	while (max_scan--) {
>   		void *entry = xas_prev(&xas);
>   		if (!entry || xa_is_value(entry))
> -			return xas.xa_index;
> -		if (xas.xa_index == ULONG_MAX && index != ULONG_MAX)
> -			return xas.xa_index;
> +			break;
> +		if (xas.xa_index == ULONG_MAX)
> +			break;
>   	}
>   
> -	/* No gaps in range and no wrap-around, return index beyond range */
> -	return xas.xa_index - 1;
> +	return xas.xa_index;
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_cache_prev_miss);
>