From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753447AbbLCXnt (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 18:43:49 -0500 Received: from mail-yk0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:35556 "EHLO mail-yk0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751141AbbLCXnr (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 18:43:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1449093339.9855.1.camel@hpe.com> References: <1448309082-20851-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <1449022764.31589.24.camel@hpe.com> <1449078237.31589.30.camel@hpe.com> <1449084362.31589.37.camel@hpe.com> <1449086521.31589.39.camel@hpe.com> <1449087125.31589.45.camel@hpe.com> <1449092226.31589.50.camel@hpe.com> <1449093339.9855.1.camel@hpe.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 15:43:46 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Fix mmap MAP_POPULATE for DAX pmd mapping From: Dan Williams To: Toshi Kani Cc: Andrew Morton , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Matthew Wilcox , Ross Zwisler , mauricio.porto@hpe.com, Linux MM , linux-fsdevel , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Toshi Kani wrote: > On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 12:54 -0800, Dan Williams wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Toshi Kani wrote: >> > On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 11:57 -0800, Dan Williams wrote: >> [..] >> > > The whole point of __get_user_page_fast() is to avoid the overhead of >> > > taking the mm semaphore to access the vma. _PAGE_SPECIAL simply tells >> > > __get_user_pages_fast that it needs to fallback to the >> > > __get_user_pages slow path. >> > >> > I see. Then, I think gup_huge_pmd() can simply return 0 when !pfn_valid(), >> > instead of VM_BUG_ON. >> >> Is pfn_valid() a reliable check? It seems to be based on a max_pfn >> per node... what happens when pmem is located below that point. I >> haven't been able to convince myself that we won't get false >> positives, but maybe I'm missing something. > > I believe we use the version of pfn_valid() in linux/mmzone.h. Talking this over with Dave we came to the conclusion that it would be safer to be explicit about the pmd not being mapped. He points out that unless a platform can guarantee that persistent memory is always section aligned we might get false positive pfn_valid() indications. Given the get_user_pages_fast() path is arch specific we can simply have an arch specific pmd bit and not worry about generically enabling a "pmd special" bit for now.