Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] mm: vmalloc: export find_vm_area()

Uladzislau Rezki
2026-01-24T10:49:03Z

Hello, D. Wythe!

> On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 07:55:17PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 04:23:48PM +0800, D. Wythe wrote:
> > > find_vm_area() provides a way to find the vm_struct associated with a
> > > virtual address. Export this symbol to modules so that modularized
> > > subsystems can perform lookups on vmalloc addresses.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: D. Wythe <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
> > > ---
> > > mm/vmalloc.c | 1 +
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > > index ecbac900c35f..3eb9fe761c34 100644
> > > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> > > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > > @@ -3292,6 +3292,7 @@ struct vm_struct *find_vm_area(const void *addr)
> > >
> > > return va->vm;
> > > }
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(find_vm_area);
> > >
> > This is internal. We can not just export it.
> >
> > --
> > Uladzislau Rezki
>
> Hi Uladzislau,
>
> Thank you for the feedback. I agree that we should avoid exposing
> internal implementation details like struct vm_struct to external
> subsystems.
>
> Following Christoph's suggestion, I'm planning to encapsulate the page
> order lookup into a minimal helper instead:
>
> unsigned int vmalloc_page_order(const void *addr){
> struct vm_struct *vm;
> vm = find_vm_area(addr);
> return vm ? vm->page_order : 0;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vmalloc_page_order);
>
> Does this approach look reasonable to you? It would keep the vm_struct
> layout private while satisfying the optimization needs of SMC.
>
Could you please clarify why you need info about page_order? I have not
looked at your second patch.

Thanks!

--
Uladzislau Rezki