linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/gup: Drain batched mlock folio processing before attempting migration

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: <aLGpcOSTGiJIRQda@willie-the-truck>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 14:21:52 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Keir Fraser <keirf@...gle.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
	Frederick Mayle <fmayle@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Ge Yang <yangge1116@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/gup: Drain batched mlock folio processing before
 attempting migration

On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 12:57:43PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 01:47:14AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > Patch is against 6.17-rc3; but if you'd prefer the patch against 6.12
> > (or an intervening release), I already did the backport so please just
> > ask.
> 
> We've got 6.15 working well at the moment, so I'll backport your diff
> to that.

Notwithstanding my question about the synchronisation, I cherry-picked
86ebd50224c0 ("mm: add folio_expected_ref_count() for reference count
calculation") to my 6.15-based Android tree and applied your diff on top.

With that, I've not managed to reproduce the original failure and
haven't observed any migration failures on the GUP path.

Cheers,

Will