On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 02:24:11PM -0500, Kalra, Ashish wrote: > > On 10/5/2023 5:28 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 05:01:23PM -0500, Kalra, Ashish wrote: > > > On 10/5/2023 4:28 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 01:41:38PM -0500, Kalra, Ashish wrote: > > > > > > +static void unshare_all_memory(bool unmap) > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > + unsigned long addr, end; > > > > > > + long found = 0, shared; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > + * Walk direct mapping and convert all shared memory back to private, > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > + > > > > > > + addr = PAGE_OFFSET; > > > > > > + end = PAGE_OFFSET + get_max_mapped(); > > > > > > + > > > > > > + while (addr < end) { > > > > > > + unsigned long size; > > > > > > + unsigned int level; > > > > > > + pte_t *pte; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + pte = lookup_address(addr, &level); > > > > > > > > > > IIRC, you were earlier walking the direct mapping using > > > > > walk_page_range_novma(), any particular reason to use lookup_address() > > > > > instead ? > > > > > > > > walk_page_range_novma() wants mmap lock to be taken, but it is tricky as > > > > we run here from atomic context in case of crash. > > > > > > > > I considered using trylock to bypass the limitation, but it is a hack. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + size = page_level_size(level); > > > > > > + > > > > > > + if (pte && pte_decrypted(*pte)) { > > > > > > > > > > Additionally need to add check for pte_none() here to handle physical memory > > > > > holes in direct mapping. > > > > > > > > lookup_address() returns NULL for none entries. > > > > > > > > > > Looking at lookup_address_in_pgd(), at pte level it is simply returning > > > pte_offset_kernel() and there does not seem to be a check for returning NULL > > > if pte_none() ? > > > > Hm. You are right. > > > > I think it yet another quirk in how lookup_address() implemented. We need > > to make it straight too. > > > > There's two options: either make lookup_address() return pointer for entry > > even if it is NULL, or add check for pte_none() after pte_offset_kernel() > > and return NULL if it is true. > > > > I like the first option more as it allows caller to populate the entry if > > it wants. > > Yes, i like the first option. I tried to this, but lookup_address() has to many callers. It gets beyond the scope of the patchset. I will add pte_none() check on unshare side for now. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec