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;
Subject: Re: Sealed memfd & no-fault mmap
To:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com>,
        "tytso@mit.edu" <tytso@mit.edu>
References: <vs1Us2sm4qmfvLOqNat0-r16GyfmWzqUzQ4KHbXJwEcjhzeoQ4sBTxx7QXDG9B6zk5AeT7FsNb3CSr94LaKy6Novh1fbbw8D_BBxYsbPLms=@emersion.fr>
 <CAHk-=wgmGv2EGscKSi8SrQWtEVpEQyk-ZN1Xj4EoAB87Dmx1gA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210429154807.hptls4vnmq2svuea@box> <20210429183836.GF8339@xz-x1>
 <lpi4uT69AFMwtmWtwW_qJAmYm_r0jRikL11G_zI4X7wq--6Jtpiej8kGn8gePfv0Dtn4VmzsOqT2Q5-L3ca2niDi0nlC0nVYphbFBnNJnw0=@emersion.fr>
 <CAHk-=wiAs7Ky9gmWAeqk5t7Nkueip13XPGtUcmMiZjwf-sX3sQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <hnL7s1u925fpeUhs90fXUpD3GG_4gmHlpznN8E0885tSM40QYb3VVTFGkwpmxYQ3U8HkRSUtfqw0ZfBKptA4pIw4FZw1MdRhSHC94iQATEE=@emersion.fr>
 <CAHk-=wiY1BL-UHPMEAbd7nY3vu6w41A1hhvjg1DoBXWuRt9_qw@mail.gmail.com>
 <7718ec5b-0a9e-ffa6-16f2-bc0b6afbd9ab@gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wjv3-eP7mSDJbuvaB+CbyyKc4g_nEzhQLcueOd0_YuiBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <80c87e6b-6050-bf23-2185-ded408df4d0f@gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whSGS=R8PtrfNcDTkCKOengEqygqeWjOZa2b8QkuOueDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LSU.2.11.2105291315330.25425@eggly.anvils>
From:   Ming Lin <minggr@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <36fc2485-11f1-5252-904d-f26b63a6cd58@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 29 May 2021 16:36:14 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2105291315330.25425@eggly.anvils>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/29/2021 1:15 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> 
> NOFAULT? Does BSD use "fault" differently, and in Linux terms we
> would say NOSIGBUS to mean the same?
> 
> Can someone point to a specification of BSD's __MAP_NOFAULT?
> Searching just found me references to bugs.

Checked freebsd and openbsd, their MAP_NOFAULT seems quite different
than NOSIGBUS.

freebsd: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src
MAP_NOFAULT: The mapping should not generate page faults

openbsd: https://github.com/openbsd/src
__MAP_NOFAULT only makes sense with a backing object

> 
> What mainly worries me about the suggestion is: what happens to the
> zero page inserted into NOFAULT mappings, when later a page for that
> offset is created and added to page cache?
> 
> Treating it as an opaque blob of zeroes, that stays there ever after,
> hiding the subsequent data: easy to implement, but a hack that we would
> probably regret.  (And I notice that even the quote from David Herrmann
> in the original post allows for the possibility that client may want to
> expand the object.)

Yes, that's problem ...

> 
> I believe the correct behaviour would be to unmap the nofault page
> then, allowing the proper page to be faulted in after.  That is
> certainly doable (the old mm/filemap_xip.c used to do so), but might
> get into some awkward race territory, with filesystem dependence
> (reminiscent of hole punch, in reverse).  shmem could operate that
> way, and be the better for it: but I wouldn't want to add that,
> without also cleaning away all the shmem_recalc_inode() stuff.

After we treat it as zero page, then no page fault for later read.
What is the timing to unmap the nofault page?

I'm reading filemap_xip.c to learn how to do it.
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v3.19.8/source/mm/filemap_xip.c