Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: Add zap_skip_check_mapping() helper

[David Hildenbrand]

On 03.09.21 03:50, Alistair Popple wrote:
> On Friday, 3 September 2021 11:39:32 AM AEST Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 10:58:53AM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > > On Friday, 3 September 2021 6:18:19 AM AEST Peter Xu wrote:
> > > > Use the helper for the checks.  Rename "check_mapping" into "zap_mapping"
> > > > because "check_mapping" looks like a bool but in fact it stores the mapping
> > > > itself.  When it's set, we check the mapping (it must be non-NULL).  When it's
> > > > cleared we skip the check, which works like the old way.
> > > >
> > > > Move the duplicated comments to the helper too.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >   include/linux/mm.h | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> > > >   mm/memory.c        | 29 ++++++-----------------------
> > > >   2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
> > > > index 69259229f090..81e402a5fbc9 100644
> > > > --- a/include/linux/mm.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
> > > > @@ -1720,10 +1720,23 @@ extern void user_shm_unlock(size_t, struct ucounts *);
> > > >    * Parameter block passed down to zap_pte_range in exceptional cases.
> > > >    */
> > > >   struct zap_details {
> > > > -	struct address_space *check_mapping;	/* Check page->mapping if set */
> > > > +	struct address_space *zap_mapping;	/* Check page->mapping if set */
> > > >   	struct page *single_page;		/* Locked page to be unmapped */
> > > >   };
> > > >   
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * We set details->zap_mappings when we want to unmap shared but keep private
> > > > + * pages. Return true if skip zapping this page, false otherwise.
> > > > + */
> > > > +static inline bool
> > > > +zap_skip_check_mapping(struct zap_details *details, struct page *page)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	if (!details || !page)
> > > > +		return false;
> > > > +
> > > > +	return details->zap_mapping != page_rmapping(page);
> > >
> > > Shouldn't this check still be
> > > details->zap_mapping && details->zap_mapping != page_rmapping(page)?
> > >
> > > Previously we wouldn't skip zapping pages if even_cows == true (ie.
> > > details->check_mapping == NULL). With this change the check when
> > > even_cows == true becomes NULL != page_rmapping(page). Doesn't this mean we
> > > will now skip zapping any pages with a mapping when even_cows == true?
> >
> > Yes I think so.  Thanks for pointing that out, Alistair, I'll fix in v3.
> >
> > But frankly I really think we should simply have that flag I used to introduce.
> > It'll make everything much clearer.
>
> Yeah, I think a flag would also be fine.

I still don't see the need for a flag quite frankly. Just factor out the 
checks we already have ... no change in behavior.


--
Thanks,

David / dhildenb