[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <37c2b525-5c2c-d400-552c-9ccb91f4d7bf@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 09:39:38 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Saurabh Singh Sengar <ssengar@...rosoft.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/thp: fix "mm: thp: kill __transhuge_page_enabled()"
On 22.08.23 01:48, Zach O'Keefe wrote:
> The 6.0 commits:
>
> commit 9fec51689ff6 ("mm: thp: kill transparent_hugepage_active()")
> commit 7da4e2cb8b1f ("mm: thp: kill __transhuge_page_enabled()")
>
> merged "can we have THPs in this VMA?" logic that was previously done
> separately by fault-path, khugepaged, and smaps "THPeligible" checks.
>
> During the process, the semantics of the fault path check changed in two
> ways:
>
> 1) A VM_NO_KHUGEPAGED check was introduced (also added to smaps path).
> 2) We no longer checked if non-anonymous memory had a vm_ops->huge_fault
> handler that could satisfy the fault. Previously, this check had been
> done in create_huge_pud() and create_huge_pmd() routines, but after
> the changes, we never reach those routines.
>
> During the review of the above commits, it was determined that in-tree
> users weren't affected by the change; most notably, since the only relevant
> user (in terms of THP) of VM_MIXEDMAP or ->huge_fault is DAX, which is
> explicitly approved early in approval logic. However, there is at least
> one occurrence where an out-of-tree driver that used
> VM_HUGEPAGE|VM_MIXEDMAP with a vm_ops->huge_fault handler, was broken.
... so all we did is break an arbitrary out-of-tree driver? Sorry to
say, but why should we care?
Is there any in-tree code affected and needs a "Fixes:" ?
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists