On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 06:11:21AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 03:52:12AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 05:21:11AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 02:57:55AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 04:15:33AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > Sometimes you might want to use MAP_POPULATE to ask a device driver to > > > > > initialize the device memory in some specific manner. SGX driver can use > > > > > this to request more memory by issuing ENCLS[EAUG] x86 opcode for each > > > > > page in the address range. > > > > > > > > > > Add f_ops->populate() with the same parameters as f_ops->mmap() and make > > > > > it conditionally called inside call_mmap(). Update call sites > > > > > accodingly. > > > > > > > > Your device driver has a ->mmap operation. Why does it need another > > > > one? More explanation required here. > > > > > > f_ops->mmap() would require an additional parameter, which results > > > heavy refactoring. > > > > > > struct file_operations has 1125 references in the kernel tree, so I > > > decided to check this way around first. > > > > Are you saying that your device driver behaves differently if > > MAP_POPULATE is set versus if it isn't? That seems hideously broken. > > MAP_POPULATE does not do anything (according to __mm_populate in mm/gup.c) > with VMA's that have some sort of device/IO memory, i.e. vm_flags > intersecting with VM_PFNMAP | VM_IO. > > I can extend the guard obviously to: > > if (!ret && do_populate && file->f_op->populate && > !!(vma->vm_flags & (VM_IO | VM_PFNMAP))) > file->f_op->populate(file, vma); Are you deliberately avoiding the question? I'm not asking about implementation. I'm asking about the semantics of MAP_POPULATE with your driver.
