From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 441C518DF9D for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 22:30:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722378615; cv=none; b=e7c8pT7oEVhT7h/jxcDrTk7kMA0i/rPrVH4PQ2HQvNlZyFnsG/Dc6PAOeek0f86PkB5DJ4a1JR0c86ZwpIG2iR22/7QjplajVb9B2fFP0pWsrNjRHf7RIvcUIrlPV+MZy1Q5nJ/1wYb62/IdnoKjgvK9QQv41KSsfapwDdVRbOw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722378615; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lukyko6WhLd86bIprzKWnfPyMYA0WNaoHkIQZi8WLTc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sYB66Qf7dD1dlAIRva01k6yUIE+5YqdiPrPAHRSxwXvQ2HdqAZEYHH6O6UPYWBKjvVsnyTGnYVOS1th4bYOOZAUtEb3sbpgnBL0Nfl4SQdF6XMvNyn4YfATxvul7U8IPpap7unF6oCmyyWAfrALqKyVJgs5g9sSVWSUsncFtMKo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=bEuVepDD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="bEuVepDD" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1722378612; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=y5kNYpg9eUUfaVFQlHs3iXOjdZpeVmxNiRg//4lRozI=; b=bEuVepDDHuRZPnoRaO5DGFC+XJbTZOsTV5euOlAK3eEXKaVtIf7Z7pVj3WeJpy4qVuueWE JZlk5sAgAe/+U1uv6SAxbQj1l3ZsxvSjoElJT+rEQv2pltFg/wOiP7gpFMgRksTqigZUQo 7rsoknJOlvXr4tMEG8JMYsWWItMJ7B4= Received: from mail-oo1-f70.google.com (mail-oo1-f70.google.com [209.85.161.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-313-y4ZyhBb5OxCUcFejk4Jv-A-1; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 18:30:10 -0400 X-MC-Unique: y4ZyhBb5OxCUcFejk4Jv-A-1 Received: by mail-oo1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5d5b4ffa0c8so1027349eaf.1 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:30:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722378609; x=1722983409; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=y5kNYpg9eUUfaVFQlHs3iXOjdZpeVmxNiRg//4lRozI=; b=riexM55xAwGR51KLQjB5ZU/wUD+0J1EIWrnwC8pfW2VtqRi3r4Yg8j+xEwyxtjX5cV kVsH4DexYnDnGpw5l1yLBFF32bsL3WfsaAUNxmMoqd0FdVmiV/Xah1qegAQwJZEdxdOl 7KhGHIMrLDZ0kdiqSyabJXLwn0ajqHEU6+UY+3nteWsswJ7+iq0L0MuaFAdmqFtNADYy 5hEL3qqMYvdb3vNUHWYWonkl6FjZmx8q/QsdOCgJpFuuOAVEM63CpKw7frjUqmDuOo3A dGImmt9ET8gO+p6G8gz6zcEzUBt/flUl+OC2XSNhBHaxHTuresNQkObYLfnmvNk3Jswd j16Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXLgGlBb9xKq6XVtz24i5uYiynxI4BiS4HBXHpGM9JFi2XNF2wI0zS1vm8DhwCss/Hm6jE48eahhJEqHJfLxNV3ZvtIGUsx X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzlpC8TJarZp8gkrU1IyCHCWzhxFR53Kbg6ScbeNN4FT/oSW0xN DWjuXBPk9mOpPynhYuHQn8yUsks63ZT+v5pnC3IJtypcRt4oBxl/YZqYCcUQQhlUDIn0HO5jnih LNb765Izo/yq8B5JtlZ0/1EOwgMb0nwnOC/PKH0u7A5nOwL0xU1a2eQ== X-Received: by 2002:a4a:a542:0:b0:5c7:b587:40a7 with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5d5b15373c5mr10749406eaf.1.1722378609525; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:30:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFJByCxdD1t4UZwfqqPdgCZsn2gbVDdIJGfCxxyPNKDP8T1DbcoLV+Wd5i1D2Eds9HHRRl71Q== X-Received: by 2002:a4a:a542:0:b0:5c7:b587:40a7 with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5d5b15373c5mr10749390eaf.1.1722378609089; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:30:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x1n (pool-99-254-121-117.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [99.254.121.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-6bb5bcffd18sm45807036d6.15.2024.07.30.15.30.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:30:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 18:30:06 -0400 From: Peter Xu To: James Houghton Cc: David Hildenbrand , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Oscar Salvador , Muchun Song , Baolin Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix hugetlb vs. core-mm PT locking Message-ID: References: <20240730200341.1642904-1-david@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 01:43:35PM -0700, James Houghton wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 1:03 PM David Hildenbrand wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > > index b100df8cb5857..1b1f40ff00b7d 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > > @@ -2926,6 +2926,12 @@ static inline spinlock_t *pte_lockptr(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd) > > return ptlock_ptr(page_ptdesc(pmd_page(*pmd))); > > } > > > > +static inline spinlock_t *ptep_lockptr(struct mm_struct *mm, pte_t *pte) > > +{ > > + BUILD_BUG_ON(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HIGHPTE)); > > + return ptlock_ptr(virt_to_ptdesc(pte)); > > Hi David, > > Small question: ptep_lockptr() does not handle the case where the size > of the PTE table is larger than PAGE_SIZE, but pmd_lockptr() does. > IIUC, for pte_lockptr() and ptep_lockptr() to return the same result > in this case, ptep_lockptr() should be doing the masking that > pmd_lockptr() is doing. Are you sure that you don't need to be doing > it? (Or maybe I am misunderstanding something.) I was just curious and looked at pte_alloc_one(), not too much archs implemented it besides the default (which calls pte_alloc_one_noprof(), and should be order=0 there). I didn't see any arch that actually allocated with non-zero orders. The motorola/m68k one is slightly involved, but still.. nothing I spot yet. Thanks, -- Peter Xu