arch/riscv/include/asm/pgtable.h | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
Make sure we return the right pud value and not a value that could
have been overwritten in between by a different core.
Fixes: c3cc2a4a3a23 ("riscv: Add support for PUD THP")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
---
Note that this will conflict with
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20250625063753.77511-1-ajd@linux.ibm.com/
if applied after 6.17.
---
arch/riscv/include/asm/pgtable.h | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/pgtable.h
index 91697fbf1f9013005800f713797e4b6b1fc8d312..e69346307e78608dd98d8b7a77b7063c333448ee 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/pgtable.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/pgtable.h
@@ -942,6 +942,17 @@ static inline int pudp_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
return ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, (pte_t *)pudp);
}
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_PUDP_HUGE_GET_AND_CLEAR
+static inline pud_t pudp_huge_get_and_clear(struct mm_struct *mm,
+ unsigned long address, pud_t *pudp)
+{
+ pud_t pud = __pud(atomic_long_xchg((atomic_long_t *)pudp, 0));
+
+ page_table_check_pud_clear(mm, pud);
+
+ return pud;
+}
+
static inline int pud_young(pud_t pud)
{
return pte_young(pud_pte(pud));
---
base-commit: 62950c35a515743739e3d863eac25c20a5bd1613
change-id: 20250814-dev-alex-thp_pud_xchg-8153c313d946
Best regards,
--
Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
Hi Alex, On Thu, 14 Aug 2025, Alexandre Ghiti wrote: > Make sure we return the right pud value and not a value that could > have been overwritten in between by a different core. > > Fixes: c3cc2a4a3a23 ("riscv: Add support for PUD THP") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com> > --- > Note that this will conflict with > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20250625063753.77511-1-ajd@linux.ibm.com/ > if applied after 6.17. Two quick questions on this one: - I see that you're using atomic_long_xchg() here and in some similar functions in pgtable.h, rather than xchg(). Was curious about the rationale for that? - x86 avoids the xchg() for !CONFIG_SMP. Should we do the same? thanks, - Paul
On 9/20/25 03:39, Paul Walmsley wrote: > Hi Alex, > > On Thu, 14 Aug 2025, Alexandre Ghiti wrote: > >> Make sure we return the right pud value and not a value that could >> have been overwritten in between by a different core. >> >> Fixes: c3cc2a4a3a23 ("riscv: Add support for PUD THP") >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com> >> --- >> Note that this will conflict with >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20250625063753.77511-1-ajd@linux.ibm.com/ >> if applied after 6.17. > Two quick questions on this one: > > - I see that you're using atomic_long_xchg() here and in some similar > functions in pgtable.h, rather than xchg(). Was curious about the > rationale for that? Both functions amount to the same, I just used the same function as for existing similar functions. > > - x86 avoids the xchg() for !CONFIG_SMP. Should we do the same? Sounds like micro optimization to me, but up to you. > > thanks, > > - Paul >
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.