linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mm: Call pointers to ptes as ptep

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: <574a1c6f-f542-408e-8d26-728749892b1c@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 18:55:28 +0530
From: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
 jannh@...gle.com, pfalcato@...e.de, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterx@...hat.com, ryan.roberts@....com,
 mingo@...nel.org, libang.li@...group.com, maobibo@...ngson.cn,
 zhengqi.arch@...edance.com, baohua@...nel.org, anshuman.khandual@....com,
 willy@...radead.org, ioworker0@...il.com, yang@...amperecomputing.com,
 baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, ziy@...dia.com, hughd@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mm: Call pointers to ptes as ptep


On 11/06/25 6:53 pm, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 10.06.25 05:50, Dev Jain wrote:
>> Avoid confusion between pte_t* and pte_t data types by suffixing pointer
>> type variables with p. No functional change.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
>> Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
>> ---
>>   mm/mremap.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++---------------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
>> index 60f6b8d0d5f0..180b12225368 100644
>> --- a/mm/mremap.c
>> +++ b/mm/mremap.c
>> @@ -176,7 +176,8 @@ static int move_ptes(struct 
>> pagetable_move_control *pmc,
>>       struct vm_area_struct *vma = pmc->old;
>>       bool need_clear_uffd_wp = vma_has_uffd_without_event_remap(vma);
>>       struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm;
>> -    pte_t *old_pte, *new_pte, pte;
>> +    pte_t *old_ptep, *new_ptep;
>> +    pte_t pte;
>
> Could have left that on the same line ...

AFAIR Lorenzo had insisted on moving that to a new line.


>
>>       pmd_t dummy_pmdval;
>>       spinlock_t *old_ptl, *new_ptl;
>>       bool force_flush = false;
>> @@ -211,8 +212,8 @@ static int move_ptes(struct 
>> pagetable_move_control *pmc,
>>        * We don't have to worry about the ordering of src and dst
>>        * pte locks because exclusive mmap_lock prevents deadlock.
>>        */
>> -    old_pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, old_pmd, old_addr, &old_ptl);
>> -    if (!old_pte) {
>> +    old_ptep = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, old_pmd, old_addr, &old_ptl);
>> +    if (!old_ptep) {
>>           err = -EAGAIN;
>
> One of those things that's completely inconsistent all over the place.
>
> But yeah, I agree that ptep is much better for a PTE pointer.
>
> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>