The only path that doesn't use generic "**pages" handling is the gate vma.
Make it use the same path, meanwhile tune the next_page label upper to
cover "**pages" handling. This prepares for THP handling for "**pages".
Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
---
mm/gup.c | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
index 8d59ae4554e7..a2d1b3c4b104 100644
--- a/mm/gup.c
+++ b/mm/gup.c
@@ -1135,7 +1135,7 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
if (!vma && in_gate_area(mm, start)) {
ret = get_gate_page(mm, start & PAGE_MASK,
gup_flags, &vma,
- pages ? &pages[i] : NULL);
+ pages ? &page : NULL);
if (ret)
goto out;
ctx.page_mask = 0;
@@ -1205,19 +1205,18 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
ret = PTR_ERR(page);
goto out;
}
-
- goto next_page;
} else if (IS_ERR(page)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(page);
goto out;
}
+next_page:
if (pages) {
pages[i] = page;
flush_anon_page(vma, page, start);
flush_dcache_page(page);
ctx.page_mask = 0;
}
-next_page:
+
page_increm = 1 + (~(start >> PAGE_SHIFT) & ctx.page_mask);
if (page_increm > nr_pages)
page_increm = nr_pages;
--
2.40.1
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 05:53:44PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> The only path that doesn't use generic "**pages" handling is the gate vma.
> Make it use the same path, meanwhile tune the next_page label upper to
> cover "**pages" handling. This prepares for THP handling for "**pages".
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/gup.c | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> index 8d59ae4554e7..a2d1b3c4b104 100644
> --- a/mm/gup.c
> +++ b/mm/gup.c
> @@ -1135,7 +1135,7 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
> if (!vma && in_gate_area(mm, start)) {
> ret = get_gate_page(mm, start & PAGE_MASK,
> gup_flags, &vma,
> - pages ? &pages[i] : NULL);
> + pages ? &page : NULL);
Good spot... ugh that we handled this differently.
> if (ret)
> goto out;
> ctx.page_mask = 0;
We can drop this line now right? As the new next_page block will duplicate
this.
> @@ -1205,19 +1205,18 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
> ret = PTR_ERR(page);
> goto out;
> }
> -
> - goto next_page;
This is neat, we've already checked if pages != NULL so the if (pages)
block at the new next_page label will not be run.
> } else if (IS_ERR(page)) {
> ret = PTR_ERR(page);
> goto out;
> }
> +next_page:
> if (pages) {
> pages[i] = page;
> flush_anon_page(vma, page, start);
> flush_dcache_page(page);
I guess there's no harm that we now flush here, though it seems to me to be
superfluous, it's not a big deal I don't think.
> ctx.page_mask = 0;
> }
> -next_page:
> +
> page_increm = 1 + (~(start >> PAGE_SHIFT) & ctx.page_mask);
> if (page_increm > nr_pages)
> page_increm = nr_pages;
> --
> 2.40.1
>
Other than that, LGTM,
Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>
On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 08:48:38PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 05:53:44PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > The only path that doesn't use generic "**pages" handling is the gate vma.
> > Make it use the same path, meanwhile tune the next_page label upper to
> > cover "**pages" handling. This prepares for THP handling for "**pages".
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > mm/gup.c | 7 +++----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> > index 8d59ae4554e7..a2d1b3c4b104 100644
> > --- a/mm/gup.c
> > +++ b/mm/gup.c
> > @@ -1135,7 +1135,7 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > if (!vma && in_gate_area(mm, start)) {
> > ret = get_gate_page(mm, start & PAGE_MASK,
> > gup_flags, &vma,
> > - pages ? &pages[i] : NULL);
> > + pages ? &page : NULL);
>
> Good spot... ugh that we handled this differently.
>
> > if (ret)
> > goto out;
> > ctx.page_mask = 0;
>
> We can drop this line now right? As the new next_page block will duplicate
> this.
OK I can see why you left this in given the last patch in the series :)
Please disregard.
>
> > @@ -1205,19 +1205,18 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > ret = PTR_ERR(page);
> > goto out;
> > }
> > -
> > - goto next_page;
>
> This is neat, we've already checked if pages != NULL so the if (pages)
> block at the new next_page label will not be run.
>
> > } else if (IS_ERR(page)) {
> > ret = PTR_ERR(page);
> > goto out;
> > }
> > +next_page:
> > if (pages) {
> > pages[i] = page;
> > flush_anon_page(vma, page, start);
> > flush_dcache_page(page);
>
> I guess there's no harm that we now flush here, though it seems to me to be
> superfluous, it's not a big deal I don't think.
>
> > ctx.page_mask = 0;
> > }
> > -next_page:
> > +
> > page_increm = 1 + (~(start >> PAGE_SHIFT) & ctx.page_mask);
> > if (page_increm > nr_pages)
> > page_increm = nr_pages;
> > --
> > 2.40.1
> >
>
> Other than that, LGTM,
>
> Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>
On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 09:00:34PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 08:48:38PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 05:53:44PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > The only path that doesn't use generic "**pages" handling is the gate vma.
> > > Make it use the same path, meanwhile tune the next_page label upper to
> > > cover "**pages" handling. This prepares for THP handling for "**pages".
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > mm/gup.c | 7 +++----
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> > > index 8d59ae4554e7..a2d1b3c4b104 100644
> > > --- a/mm/gup.c
> > > +++ b/mm/gup.c
> > > @@ -1135,7 +1135,7 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > if (!vma && in_gate_area(mm, start)) {
> > > ret = get_gate_page(mm, start & PAGE_MASK,
> > > gup_flags, &vma,
> > > - pages ? &pages[i] : NULL);
> > > + pages ? &page : NULL);
> >
> > Good spot... ugh that we handled this differently.
> >
> > > if (ret)
> > > goto out;
> > > ctx.page_mask = 0;
> >
> > We can drop this line now right? As the new next_page block will duplicate
> > this.
>
> OK I can see why you left this in given the last patch in the series :)
> Please disregard.
Yes the other "page_mask=0" will be removed in the next (not last) patch.
>
> >
> > > @@ -1205,19 +1205,18 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > ret = PTR_ERR(page);
> > > goto out;
> > > }
> > > -
> > > - goto next_page;
> >
> > This is neat, we've already checked if pages != NULL so the if (pages)
> > block at the new next_page label will not be run.
Yes.
> >
> > > } else if (IS_ERR(page)) {
> > > ret = PTR_ERR(page);
> > > goto out;
> > > }
> > > +next_page:
> > > if (pages) {
> > > pages[i] = page;
> > > flush_anon_page(vma, page, start);
> > > flush_dcache_page(page);
> >
> > I guess there's no harm that we now flush here, though it seems to me to be
> > superfluous, it's not a big deal I don't think.
I'd say GUP on gate vma page should be so rare so yeah I think it shouldn't
be a big deal. Even iiuc vsyscall=xonly should be the default, so gup may
have already failed on a gate vma page even trying to read-only..
> >
> > > ctx.page_mask = 0;
> > > }
> > > -next_page:
> > > +
> > > page_increm = 1 + (~(start >> PAGE_SHIFT) & ctx.page_mask);
> > > if (page_increm > nr_pages)
> > > page_increm = nr_pages;
> > > --
> > > 2.40.1
> > >
> >
> > Other than that, LGTM,
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>
Thanks for looking!
--
Peter Xu
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.