Some architectures can have their hugetlb pages down at the lowest PTE
level: their huge_pte_alloc() using pte_alloc_map(), but without any
following pte_unmap(). Since none of these arches uses CONFIG_HIGHPTE,
this is not seen as a problem at present; but would become a problem if
forthcoming changes were to add an rcu_read_lock() into pte_offset_map(),
with the rcu_read_unlock() expected in pte_unmap().
Similarly in their huge_pte_offset(): pte_offset_kernel() is good enough
for that, but it's probably less confusing if we define pte_offset_huge()
along with pte_alloc_huge(). Only define them without CONFIG_HIGHPTE:
so there would be a build error to signal if ever more work is needed.
For ease of development, define these now for 6.4-rc1, ahead of any use:
then architectures can integrate patches using them, independent from mm.
Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
---
include/linux/hugetlb.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
--- a/include/linux/hugetlb.h
+++ b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
@@ -183,6 +183,23 @@ extern struct list_head huge_boot_pages;
/* arch callbacks */
+#ifndef CONFIG_HIGHPTE
+/*
+ * pte_offset_huge() and pte_alloc_huge() are helpers for those architectures
+ * which may go down to the lowest PTE level in their huge_pte_offset() and
+ * huge_pte_alloc(): to avoid reliance on pte_offset_map() without pte_unmap().
+ */
+static inline pte_t *pte_offset_huge(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long address)
+{
+ return pte_offset_kernel(pmd, address);
+}
+static inline pte_t *pte_alloc_huge(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd,
+ unsigned long address)
+{
+ return pte_alloc(mm, pmd) ? NULL : pte_offset_huge(pmd, address);
+}
+#endif
+
pte_t *huge_pte_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
unsigned long addr, unsigned long sz);
/*
On 04/18/23 22:22, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Some architectures can have their hugetlb pages down at the lowest PTE
> level: their huge_pte_alloc() using pte_alloc_map(), but without any
> following pte_unmap(). Since none of these arches uses CONFIG_HIGHPTE,
> this is not seen as a problem at present; but would become a problem if
> forthcoming changes were to add an rcu_read_lock() into pte_offset_map(),
> with the rcu_read_unlock() expected in pte_unmap().
>
> Similarly in their huge_pte_offset(): pte_offset_kernel() is good enough
> for that, but it's probably less confusing if we define pte_offset_huge()
> along with pte_alloc_huge(). Only define them without CONFIG_HIGHPTE:
> so there would be a build error to signal if ever more work is needed.
>
> For ease of development, define these now for 6.4-rc1, ahead of any use:
> then architectures can integrate patches using them, independent from mm.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> include/linux/hugetlb.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
Hate to say that I am ignorant of the 'forthcoming changes' that might
add an rcu_read_lock() into pte_offset_map(). But, the reasoning is
sound and code is fine.
Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <[email protected]>
--
Mike Kravetz
>
> --- a/include/linux/hugetlb.h
> +++ b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
> @@ -183,6 +183,23 @@ extern struct list_head huge_boot_pages;
>
> /* arch callbacks */
>
> +#ifndef CONFIG_HIGHPTE
> +/*
> + * pte_offset_huge() and pte_alloc_huge() are helpers for those architectures
> + * which may go down to the lowest PTE level in their huge_pte_offset() and
> + * huge_pte_alloc(): to avoid reliance on pte_offset_map() without pte_unmap().
> + */
> +static inline pte_t *pte_offset_huge(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long address)
> +{
> + return pte_offset_kernel(pmd, address);
> +}
> +static inline pte_t *pte_alloc_huge(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd,
> + unsigned long address)
> +{
> + return pte_alloc(mm, pmd) ? NULL : pte_offset_huge(pmd, address);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> pte_t *huge_pte_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long addr, unsigned long sz);
> /*