On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 02:56:31PM -0700, Vishal Moola (Oracle) wrote:
> @@ -2116,7 +2118,16 @@ unsigned find_lock_entries(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t start,
> folio_put(folio);
> }
> rcu_read_unlock();
> + nr = folio_batch_count(fbatch);
> +
> + if (nr) {
> + folio = fbatch->folios[nr - 1];
> + nr = folio_nr_pages(folio);
>
> + if (folio_test_hugetlb(folio))
> + nr = 1;
> + *start = folio->index + nr;
> + }
Hmm ... this is going to go wrong if the folio is actually a shadow
entry, isn't it?
> +++ b/mm/shmem.c
> @@ -922,21 +922,18 @@ static void shmem_undo_range(struct inode *inode, loff_t lstart, loff_t lend,
>
> folio_batch_init(&fbatch);
> index = start;
> - while (index < end && find_lock_entries(mapping, index, end - 1,
> + while (index < end && find_lock_entries(mapping, &index, end - 1,
> &fbatch, indices)) {
> for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(&fbatch); i++) {
> folio = fbatch.folios[i];
>
> - index = indices[i];
> -
> if (xa_is_value(folio)) {
> if (unfalloc)
> continue;
> nr_swaps_freed += !shmem_free_swap(mapping,
> - index, folio);
> + folio->index, folio);
We know this is a value entry, so we definitely can't look at
folio->index. This should probably be:
+ indices[i], folio);
> @@ -510,20 +509,18 @@ unsigned long invalidate_mapping_pagevec(struct address_space *mapping,
> int i;
>
> folio_batch_init(&fbatch);
> - while (find_lock_entries(mapping, index, end, &fbatch, indices)) {
> + while (find_lock_entries(mapping, &index, end, &fbatch, indices)) {
> for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(&fbatch); i++) {
> struct folio *folio = fbatch.folios[i];
>
> /* We rely upon deletion not changing folio->index */
> - index = indices[i];
>
> if (xa_is_value(folio)) {
> count += invalidate_exceptional_entry(mapping,
> - index,
> - folio);
> + folio->index,
> + folio);
Same here. I'd fix the indent while you're at it to get more on that
second line and not need a third line.
