Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-84412-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <aa07e3ad-8c31-4c8b-9c4b-48c857ffc875@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:18:47 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
CC: <mawupeng1@huawei.com>, <david@redhat.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	<khlebnikov@openvz.org>, <jaredeh@gmail.com>, <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
	<hpa@zytor.com>, <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, <luto@kernel.org>,
	<tglx@linutronix.de>, <peterz@infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<x86@kernel.org>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	<bhelgaas@google.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [Question] CoW on VM_PFNMAP vma during write fault
Content-Language: en-US
To: <willy@infradead.org>
References: <20240227122814.3781907-1-mawupeng1@huawei.com>
 <a74c8b96-3fc5-44ff-949c-6e5c5e05e122@redhat.com>
 <de0cc6e0-dd15-40b6-89c2-c8e83fd6f587@redhat.com>
 <fa8f9f3b-e01e-4662-a2d5-77caeeb7b9f5@huawei.com>
 <Zd6WJe9xrRwkphfm@casper.infradead.org>
From: mawupeng <mawupeng1@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <Zd6WJe9xrRwkphfm@casper.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


On 2024/2/28 10:10, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 09:55:24AM +0800, mawupeng wrote:
>> On 2024/2/27 21:15, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 27.02.24 14:00, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> On 27.02.24 13:28, Wupeng Ma wrote:
>>>>> We find that a warn will be produced during our test, the detail log is
>>>>> shown in the end.
>>>>>
>>>>> The core problem of this warn is that the first pfn of this pfnmap vma is
>>>>> cleared during memory-failure. Digging into the source we find that this
>>>>> problem can be triggered as following:
>>>>>
>>>>> // mmap with MAP_PRIVATE and specific fd which hook mmap
>>>>> mmap(MAP_PRIVATE, fd)
>>>>>     __mmap_region
>>>>>       remap_pfn_range
>>>>>       // set vma with pfnmap and the prot of pte is read only
>>>>>     
>>>>
>>>> Okay, so we get a MAP_PRIVATE VM_PFNMAP I assume.
>>>>
>>>> What fd is that exactly? Often, we disallow private mappings in the
>>>> mmap() callback (for a good reason).
>>
>> just a device fd with device-specify mmap which use remap_pfn_range to assign memory.
> 
> But what meaning do you want MAP_PRIVATE of this fd to have?  Does it
> make sense to permit this, or should you rather just return -EINVAL if
> somebody tries to mmap() with MAP_PRIVATE set?

I think return -EINVAL if somebody tries to mmap() with MAP_PRIVATE and MAP_MAYWRITE is reasonable to me.

Read to this pfnmap vma will not trigger fault.

>