Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752051AbeAQDEW (ORCPT + 1 other); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 22:04:22 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:37868 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750885AbeAQDEV (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 22:04:21 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,371,1511856000"; d="scan'208";a="166683050" From: Andi Kleen To: Laurent Dufour Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill@shutemov.name, mhocko@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net, jack@suse.cz, Matthew Wilcox , benh@kernel.crashing.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , hpa@zytor.com, Will Deacon , Sergey Senozhatsky , Andrea Arcangeli , Alexei Starovoitov , kemi.wang@intel.com, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, Tim Chen , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/24] mm: Dont assume page-table invariance during faults References: <1515777968-867-1-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1515777968-867-4-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 19:04:12 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1515777968-867-4-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (Laurent Dufour's message of "Fri, 12 Jan 2018 18:25:47 +0100") Message-ID: <87d129tccz.fsf@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Laurent Dufour writes: > From: Peter Zijlstra > > One of the side effects of speculating on faults (without holding > mmap_sem) is that we can race with free_pgtables() and therefore we > cannot assume the page-tables will stick around. > > Remove the reliance on the pte pointer. This needs a lot more explanation. So why is this code not needed with SPF only? -Andi