Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] arm64: hugetlb: Cleanup huge_pte size discovery mechanisms

[Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>]

On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 03:04:31PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> Not all huge_pte helper APIs explicitly provide the size of the
> huge_pte. So the helpers have to depend on various methods to determine
> the size of the huge_pte. Some of these methods are dubious.
> 
> Let's clean up the code to use preferred methods and retire the dubious
> ones. The options in order of preference:
> 
>  - If size is provided as parameter, use it together with
>    num_contig_ptes(). This is explicit and works for both present and
>    non-present ptes.
> 
>  - If vma is provided as a parameter, retrieve size via
>    huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) and use it together with
>    num_contig_ptes(). This is explicit and works for both present and
>    non-present ptes.
> 
>  - If the pte is present and contiguous, use find_num_contig() to walk
>    the pgtable to find the level and infer the number of ptes from
>    level. Only works for *present* ptes.
> 
>  - If the pte is present and not contiguous and you can infer from this
>    that only 1 pte needs to be operated on. This is ok if you don't care
>    about the absolute size, and just want to know the number of ptes.
> 
>  - NEVER rely on resolving the PFN of a present pte to a folio and
>    getting the folio's size. This is fragile at best, because there is
>    nothing to stop the core-mm from allocating a folio twice as big as
>    the huge_pte then mapping it across 2 consecutive huge_ptes. Or just
>    partially mapping it.
> 
> Where we require that the pte is present, add warnings if not-present.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>

Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>