Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230628172529.744839-1-surenb@google.com> <20230628172529.744839-7-surenb@google.com>
 <ZJxulItq9iHi2Uew@x1n>
In-Reply-To: <ZJxulItq9iHi2Uew@x1n>
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2023 17:19:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJuCfpEPpdEScAG_UOiNfOTpue9ro0AP6414C4tBaK1rbVK7Hw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/6] mm: handle userfaults under VMA lock
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
        mhocko@suse.com, josef@toxicpanda.com, jack@suse.cz,
        ldufour@linux.ibm.com, laurent.dufour@fr.ibm.com,
        michel@lespinasse.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, jglisse@google.com,
        vbabka@suse.cz, minchan@google.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
        punit.agrawal@bytedance.com, lstoakes@gmail.com, hdanton@sina.com,
        apopple@nvidia.com, ying.huang@intel.com, david@redhat.com,
        yuzhao@google.com, dhowells@redhat.com, hughd@google.com,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org,
        pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@android.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:32=E2=80=AFAM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote=
:
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:25:29AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Enable handle_userfault to operate under VMA lock by releasing VMA lock
> > instead of mmap_lock and retrying. Note that FAULT_FLAG_RETRY_NOWAIT
> > should never be used when handling faults under per-VMA lock protection
> > because that would break the assumption that lock is dropped on retry.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
>
> Maybe the sanitize_fault_flags() changes suite more in patch 3, but not a
> big deal I guess.

IIUC FAULT_FLAG_RETRY_NOWAIT comes into play in this patchset only in
the context of uffds, therefore that check seems to be needed when we
enable per-VMA lock uffd support, which is this patch. Does that make
sense?

>
> Acked-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>

Thanks!

>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Peter Xu
>