Le 07/09/2020 à 22:12, Mike Rapoport a écrit :
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 08:00:55PM +0200, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
This is v2 of an RFC previously discussed here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200828140314.8556-1-gerald.schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Patch 1 is a fix for a regression in gup_fast on s390, after our conversion
to common gup_fast code. It will introduce special helper functions
pXd_addr_end_folded(), which have to be used in places where pagetable walk
is done w/o lock and with READ_ONCE, so currently only in gup_fast.
Patch 2 is an attempt to make that more generic, i.e. change pXd_addr_end()
themselves by adding an extra pXd value parameter. That was suggested by
Jason during v1 discussion, because he is already thinking of some other
places where he might want to switch to the READ_ONCE logic for pagetable
walks. In general, that would be the cleanest / safest solution, but there
is some impact on other architectures and common code, hence the new and
greatly enlarged recipient list.
Patch 3 is a "nice to have" add-on, which makes pXd_addr_end() inline
functions instead of #defines, so that we get some type checking for the
new pXd value parameter.
Not sure about Fixes/stable tags for the generic solution. Only patch 1
fixes a real bug on s390, and has Fixes/stable tags. Patches 2 + 3 might
still be nice to have in stable, to ease future backports, but I guess
"nice to have" does not really qualify for stable backports.
I also think that adding pXd parameter to pXd_addr_end() is a cleaner
way and with this patch 1 is not really required. I would even merge
patches 2 and 3 into a single patch and use only it as the fix.
Why not merging patches 2 and 3, but I would keep patch 1 separate but
after the generic changes, so that we first do the generic changes, then
we do the specific S390 use of it.
Christophe
