On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 04:41:19PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 04:37:58PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 05:26:58PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > What we're discussing is whether gup_fast and pup_fast also obey this, > > > or fall over and can give you the struct page that's backing the > > > dma_mmap_* memory. Since the _fast variant doesn't check for > > > vma->vm_flags, and afaict that's the only thing which closes this gap. > > > And like you restate, that would be a bit a problem. So where's that > > > check which Jason&me aren't spotting? > > > > remap_pte_range uses pte_mkspecial to set up the PTEs, and gup_pte_range > > errors out on pte_special. Of course this only works for the > > CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL case, for other architectures we do have > > a real problem. > > Except that we don't really support pte-level gup-fast without > CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL, and in fact all architectures selecting > HAVE_FAST_GUP also select ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL, so we should be fine. Mm, I thought it was probably the special flag.. Knowing that CONFIG_HAVE_FAST_GUP can't be set without CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL is pretty insightful, can we put that in the Kconfig? config HAVE_FAST_GUP depends on MMU depends on ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL bool ? Jason _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel