Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-167656-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: <345b3d66-9c18-4a25-8b1f-a84aafac5156@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 13:53:59 +0100
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] arm64/mm: Enable userfaultfd write-protect
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Joey Gouly
 <joey.gouly@arm.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
 Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
 David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
 Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>, Shivansh Vij <shivanshvij@outlook.com>,
 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240501145419.1390363-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com>
 <20240503120104.GA18156@willie-the-truck>
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240503120104.GA18156@willie-the-truck>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 03/05/2024 13:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Ryan,
> 
> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 03:54:16PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> This series adds uffd write-protect support for arm64.
>>
>> Previous attempts to add uffd-wp (and soft-dirty) have failed because of a
>> perceived lack of available PTE SW bits. However it actually turns out that
>> there are 2 available but they are hidden. PTE_PROT_NONE was previously
>> occupying a SW bit, but can be moved, freeing up the SW bit. Bit 63 is marked as
>> "IGNORED" in the Arm ARM, but it does not currently indicate "reserved for SW
>> use" like it does for the other SW bits. I've confirmed with the spec owner that
>> this is an oversight; the bit is intended to be reserved for SW use and the spec
>> will clarify this in a future update.
>>
>> So now we have two spare bits; patch 3 enables uffd-wp on arm64, using the SW
>> bit freed up by moving PTE_PROT_NONE. This leaves bit 63 spare for future use
>> (e.g. soft-dirty - see RFC at [3] - or some other usage).
> 
> Thanks, I think this series looks really good now.
> 
> From your discussion with Anshuman, it sounds like you're going to post
> a new version with the first patch split up so I'll wait for that.

Yep, I'll try to get that out this afternoon. Thanks!

> 
> Will