Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm/hugetlb: Prepare hugetlb_follow_page_mask() for FOLL_PIN

[Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 04:57:37PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 13.06.23 23:53, Peter Xu wrote:
> > It's coming, not yet, but soon.  Loose the restriction.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >   mm/hugetlb.c | 7 -------
> >   1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > index f037eaf9d819..31d8f18bc2e4 100644
> > --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> > +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > @@ -6467,13 +6467,6 @@ struct page *hugetlb_follow_page_mask(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> >   	spinlock_t *ptl;
> >   	pte_t *pte, entry;
> > -	/*
> > -	 * FOLL_PIN is not supported for follow_page(). Ordinary GUP goes via
> > -	 * follow_hugetlb_page().
> > -	 */
> > -	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(flags & FOLL_PIN))
> > -		return NULL;
> > -
> >   	hugetlb_vma_lock_read(vma);
> >   	pte = hugetlb_walk(vma, haddr, huge_page_size(h));
> >   	if (!pte)
> Did you fix why the warning was placed there in the first place? (IIRC, at
> least unsharing support needs to be added, maybe more)

Feel free to have a look at patch 2 - it should be done there, hopefully in
the right way.  And IIUC it could be a bug to not do that before (besides
CoR there was also the pgtable permission checks that was missing).  More
details in patch 2's commit message.  Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu