linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/hugetlb: Refactor __unmap_hugepage

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: <b23ef51b-1284-4168-8157-432c3e045788@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 10:56:14 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: nifan.cxl@...il.com, muchun.song@...ux.dev, willy@...radead.org
Cc: mcgrof@...nel.org, a.manzanares@...sung.com, dave@...olabs.net,
 akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Fan Ni <fan.ni@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/hugetlb: Refactor __unmap_hugepage_range() to
 take folio instead of page

On 18.04.25 18:57, nifan.cxl@...il.com wrote:
> From: Fan Ni <fan.ni@...sung.com>
> 
> The function __unmap_hugepage_range() has two kinds of users:
> 1) unmap_hugepage_range(), which passes in the head page of a folio.
>     Since unmap_hugepage_range() already takes folio and there are no other
>     uses of the folio struct in the function, it is natural for
>     __unmap_hugepage_range() to take folio also.
> 2) All other uses, which pass in NULL pointer.
> 
> In both cases, we can pass in folio. Refactor __unmap_hugepage_range() to
> take folio.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fan Ni <fan.ni@...sung.com>
> ---
> v2: fixed issue mentioned here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/aAHUluy7T32ZlYg7@debian/T/#m2b9cc1743e1907e52658815b297b9d249474f387
> 
> v1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/aAHUluy7T32ZlYg7@debian/T/#m738e9e7f7d7fe4aab6b21782b4658dd65abf8fc4
> ---
> 
>   include/linux/hugetlb.h |  4 ++--
>   mm/hugetlb.c            | 10 +++++-----
>   2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/hugetlb.h b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
> index b7699f35c87f..ebaf95231934 100644
> --- a/include/linux/hugetlb.h
> +++ b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
> @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ void unmap_hugepage_range(struct vm_area_struct *,
>   void __unmap_hugepage_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>   			  struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>   			  unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> -			  struct page *ref_page, zap_flags_t zap_flags);
> +			  struct folio *ref_folio, zap_flags_t zap_flags);
>   void hugetlb_report_meminfo(struct seq_file *);
>   int hugetlb_report_node_meminfo(char *buf, int len, int nid);
>   void hugetlb_show_meminfo_node(int nid);
> @@ -452,7 +452,7 @@ static inline long hugetlb_change_protection(
>   
>   static inline void __unmap_hugepage_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>   			struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long start,
> -			unsigned long end, struct page *ref_page,
> +			unsigned long end, struct folio *ref_folio,
>   			zap_flags_t zap_flags)
>   {

Same comment as for the previous patch, can we just call this "folio" 
instead of "ref_folio" if we are already touching it?


-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb