[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7d4d0d6a-390d-48d6-ba2a-7adfac2e30ca@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 13:18:11 +0530
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org
Cc: ryan.roberts@....com, rppt@...nel.org, shijie@...amperecomputing.com,
yang@...amperecomputing.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/pageattr: Propagate return value from
__change_memory_common
On 03/11/25 11:43 AM, Dev Jain wrote:
> Post a166563e7ec3 ("arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full"),
> __change_memory_common has a real chance of failing due to split failure.
> Before that commit, this line was introduced in c55191e96caa, still having
A small nit:
Commit description needs to follow after the SHA ID ^^^^^^^^^^
> a chance of failing if it needs to allocate pagetable memory in
> apply_to_page_range, although that has never been observed to be true.
> In general, we should always propagate the return value to the caller.
>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Fixes: c55191e96caa ("arm64: mm: apply r/o permissions of VM areas to its linear alias as well")
Does is really need a Fixes: ? There is no problem which is being fixed.
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
> ---
> Based on Linux 6.18-rc4.
>
> arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c b/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> index 5135f2d66958..b4ea86cd3a71 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> @@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ static int change_memory_common(unsigned long addr, int numpages,
> unsigned long size = PAGE_SIZE * numpages;
> unsigned long end = start + size;
> struct vm_struct *area;
> + int ret;
> int i;
>
> if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(addr)) {
> @@ -185,8 +186,10 @@ static int change_memory_common(unsigned long addr, int numpages,
> if (rodata_full && (pgprot_val(set_mask) == PTE_RDONLY ||
> pgprot_val(clear_mask) == PTE_RDONLY)) {
> for (i = 0; i < area->nr_pages; i++) {
> - __change_memory_common((u64)page_address(area->pages[i]),
> + ret = __change_memory_common((u64)page_address(area->pages[i]),
> PAGE_SIZE, set_mask, clear_mask);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> }
> }
Although the change does make sense.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists