Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 15 Mar 2021 08:52:38 +0000
Message-ID: <87eeggg5nt.wl-maz@kernel.org>
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To:     Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
Cc:     kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        will@kernel.org, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, shan.gavin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: arm64: Use find_vma_intersection()
In-Reply-To: <20210315041844.64915-3-gshan@redhat.com>
References: <20210315041844.64915-1-gshan@redhat.com>
        <20210315041844.64915-3-gshan@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
 FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/27.1
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:18:42 +0000,
Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> find_vma_intersection() has been existing to search the intersected
> vma. This uses the function where it's applicable, to simplify the
> code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c | 10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> index 84e70f953de6..286b603ed0d3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> @@ -421,10 +421,11 @@ static void stage2_unmap_memslot(struct kvm *kvm,
>  	 *     +--------------------------------------------+
>  	 */
>  	do {
> -		struct vm_area_struct *vma = find_vma(current->mm, hva);
> +		struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>  		hva_t vm_start, vm_end;
>  
> -		if (!vma || vma->vm_start >= reg_end)
> +		vma = find_vma_intersection(current->mm, hva, reg_end);

For context, here's the definition of find_vma_intersection():

<quote>
static inline struct vm_area_struct * find_vma_intersection(struct mm_struct * mm, unsigned long start_addr, unsigned long end_addr)
{
	struct vm_area_struct * vma = find_vma(mm,start_addr);

	if (vma && end_addr <= vma->vm_start)
		vma = NULL;
	return vma;
}
</quote>

It seems that there is a boundary issue in either the old code or the
new one in the case where (reg_end == vma->start).

Which one is which?

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.