Re: [PATCH v9 11/21] mm: pagewalk: Add p4d_entry() and pgd_entry()

[Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>]

On 07/22/2019 09:12 PM, Steven Price wrote:
> pgd_entry() and pud_entry() were removed by commit 0b1fbfe50006c410
> ("mm/pagewalk: remove pgd_entry() and pud_entry()") because there were
> no users. We're about to add users so reintroduce them, along with
> p4d_entry() as we now have 5 levels of tables.
> 
> Note that commit a00cc7d9dd93d66a ("mm, x86: add support for
> PUD-sized transparent hugepages") already re-added pud_entry() but with
> different semantics to the other callbacks. Since there have never
> been upstream users of this, revert the semantics back to match the
> other callbacks. This means pud_entry() is called for all entries, not
> just transparent huge pages.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/mm.h | 15 +++++++++------
>  mm/pagewalk.c      | 27 ++++++++++++++++-----------
>  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
> index 0334ca97c584..b22799129128 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
> @@ -1432,15 +1432,14 @@ void unmap_vmas(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *start_vma,
>  
>  /**
>   * mm_walk - callbacks for walk_page_range
> - * @pud_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PUD (2nd-level) entry
> - *	       this handler should only handle pud_trans_huge() puds.
> - *	       the pmd_entry or pte_entry callbacks will be used for
> - *	       regular PUDs.
> - * @pmd_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PMD (3rd-level) entry
> + * @pgd_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PGD (top-level) entry
> + * @p4d_entry: if set, called for each non-empty P4D entry
> + * @pud_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PUD entry
> + * @pmd_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PMD entry
>   *	       this handler is required to be able to handle
>   *	       pmd_trans_huge() pmds.  They may simply choose to
>   *	       split_huge_page() instead of handling it explicitly.
> - * @pte_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PTE (4th-level) entry
> + * @pte_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PTE (lowest-level) entry
>   * @pte_hole: if set, called for each hole at all levels
>   * @hugetlb_entry: if set, called for each hugetlb entry
>   * @test_walk: caller specific callback function to determine whether
> @@ -1455,6 +1454,10 @@ void unmap_vmas(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *start_vma,
>   * (see the comment on walk_page_range() for more details)
>   */
>  struct mm_walk {
> +	int (*pgd_entry)(pgd_t *pgd, unsigned long addr,
> +			 unsigned long next, struct mm_walk *walk);
> +	int (*p4d_entry)(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr,
> +			 unsigned long next, struct mm_walk *walk);
>  	int (*pud_entry)(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr,
>  			 unsigned long next, struct mm_walk *walk);
>  	int (*pmd_entry)(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
> diff --git a/mm/pagewalk.c b/mm/pagewalk.c
> index c3084ff2569d..98373a9f88b8 100644
> --- a/mm/pagewalk.c
> +++ b/mm/pagewalk.c
> @@ -90,15 +90,9 @@ static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  		}
>  
>  		if (walk->pud_entry) {
> -			spinlock_t *ptl = pud_trans_huge_lock(pud, walk->vma);
> -
> -			if (ptl) {
> -				err = walk->pud_entry(pud, addr, next, walk);
> -				spin_unlock(ptl);
> -				if (err)
> -					break;
> -				continue;
> -			}
> +			err = walk->pud_entry(pud, addr, next, walk);
> +			if (err)
> +				break;

But will not this still encounter possible THP entries when walking user
page tables (valid walk->vma) in which case still needs to get a lock.
OR will the callback take care of it ?