From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Kubecek Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull RDMA subsystem changes Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:00:40 +0200 Message-ID: <20190429090040.GB21672@unicorn.suse.cz> References: <20190428115207.GA11924@ziepe.ca> <20190429060947.GB3665@osiris> <20190429084030.GA4275@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190429084030.GA4275@mellanox.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Heiko Carstens , Doug Ledford , Linus Torvalds , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 08:40:37AM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 08:09:47AM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 11:52:12AM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > Hi Linus, > > > > > > Third rc pull request > > > > > > Nothing particularly special here. There is a small merge conflict > > > with Adrea's mm_still_valid patches which is resolved as below: > > ... > > > Jason Gunthorpe (3): > > > RDMA/mlx5: Do not allow the user to write to the clock page > > > RDMA/mlx5: Use rdma_user_map_io for mapping BAR pages > > > RDMA/ucontext: Fix regression with disassociate > > > > This doesn't compile. The patch below would fix it, but not sure if > > this is what is intended: > > > > drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c: In function 'rdma_umap_fault': > > drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c:898:28: error: 'struct vm_fault' has no member named 'vm_start' > > vmf->page = ZERO_PAGE(vmf->vm_start); > > ^~ > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c > > index 7843e89235c3..65fe89b3fa2d 100644 > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c > > @@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ static vm_fault_t rdma_umap_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf) > > > > /* Read only pages can just use the system zero page. */ > > if (!(vmf->vma->vm_flags & (VM_WRITE | VM_MAYWRITE))) { > > - vmf->page = ZERO_PAGE(vmf->vm_start); > > + vmf->page = ZERO_PAGE(vmf->vma->vm_start); > > get_page(vmf->page); > > return 0; > > } > > > > Thanks Heiko, this looks right to me. > > I'm surprised to be seeing this at this point, these patches should > have been seen by 0 day for several days now, and they were in > linux-next already too.. Most architectures have versions of ZERO_PAGE() which ignore the argument so that the code builds anyway. I'm not sure if 0-day also tests s390x builds (which is where I ran into this). Michal Kubecek