Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mm: Optimize mprotect() by batch-skipping PTEs

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

On 04.06.25 12:38, Dev Jain wrote:
> 
> On 22/05/25 9:48 pm, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 22.05.25 09:47, Dev Jain wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22/05/25 12:43 pm, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> ... likely with a better function name,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I want to be able to reuse the folio from vm_normal_folio(), and we
>>>>> also
>>>>> need
>>>>>
>>>>> nr_ptes to know how much to skip, so if there is no objection in
>>>>> passing
>>>>> int *nr_ptes,
>>>>>
>>>>> or struct folio **foliop to this new function, then I'll carry on with
>>>>> your suggestion :)
>>>>
>>>> Can you quickly prototype what you have in mind and paste it here?
>>>> Will make it easier :)
>>>
>>>
>>> if (prot_numa)
>>>
>>>        func(vma, addr, oldpte, &nr);
>>
>> I'd probably return "nr_ptes" and return the folio using a &folio
>> instead.
>>
>> That way, you can easily extend the function to return the folio in
>> the patch where you really need it (not this patch IIUR :) )
> 
> Just confirming, you mean to return nr_ptes and get the folio by passing
> &folio, and the function parameter will be struct folio **foliop?

Yes.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb