Re: [PATCH v7 12/16] arm: mm: define clear_user_highpages()
From: Ankur Arora
Date: Tue Sep 23 2025 - 18:26:07 EST
David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 17.09.25 17:24, Ankur Arora wrote:
>> For configurations with CONFIG_MMU we do not define clear_user_page().
>> This runs into issues for configurations with !CONFIG_HIGHMEM, because
>> clear_user_highpages() expects to clear_user_page() (via a default
>> version of clear_user_pages()).
>
> I'm confused. Can you elaborate once more why we cannot take care of that in
> common code?
So my definition of clear_user_highpages,
+#ifndef clear_user_highpages
+static inline void clear_user_highpages(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr,
+ unsigned int npages)
+{
+ if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HIGHMEM)) {
+ void *base = page_address(page);
+ clear_user_pages(base, vaddr, page, npages);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ do {
+ clear_user_highpage(page, vaddr);
+ vaddr += PAGE_SIZE;
+ page++;
+ } while (--npages);
+}
+#endif
assumes one of the following:
1. clear_user_highpages is defined by the architecture or,
2. HIGHMEM => arch defines clear_user_highpage or clear_user_page
3. !HIGHMEM => arch defines clear_user_pages or clear_user_page
Case 2 is fine, since ARM has clear_user_highpage().
Case 3 runs into a problem since ARM doesn't have clear_user_pages()
or clear_user_page() (it does have the second, but only with !CONFIG_MMU).
> If it's about clear_user_pages(), then you can just switch from
> !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HIGHMEM) to ifdef in patch #11.
It's worse than just clear_user_pages(), since we will have
clear_user_pages() (due to the defintion in patch-10) but that
is broken since the arch doesn't define clear_user_page().
I think the fallback defintions of clear_user_highpages() and
clear_user_pages() are reasonably sane so this needs to be addressed
in the arch code.
I defined clear_user_highpages() since it already has clear_user_highpage().
Another solution might be to define clear_user_page() for ARM which
would also address the broken-ness of clear_user_pages() but that
is more intrusive since that needs actual knowledge of the ARM mapping
model(s).
--
ankur