Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm: unexport follow_pfn

[Daniel Vetter]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 08:17:10PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 09:52:11AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 04:33:03PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > Both kvm (in bd2fae8da794 ("KVM: do not assume PTE is writable after
> > > follow_pfn")) and vfio (in 07956b6269d3 ("vfio/type1: Use
> > > follow_pte()")) have lost their callsites of follow_pfn(). All the
> > > other ones have been switched over to unsafe_follow_pfn because they
> > > cannot be fixed without breaking userspace api.
> > > 
> > > Argueably the vfio code is still racy, but that's kinda a bigger
> > > picture. But since it does leak the pte beyond where it drops the pt
> > > lock, without anything else like an mmu notifier guaranteeing
> > > coherence, the problem is at least clearly visible in the vfio code.
> > > So good enough with me.
> > > 
> > > I've decided to keep the explanation that after dropping the pt lock
> > > you must have an mmu notifier if you keep using the pte somehow by
> > > adjusting it and moving it into the kerneldoc for the new follow_pte()
> > > function.
> > > 
> > > Cc: 3pvd@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: linux-samsung-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  include/linux/mm.h |  2 --
> > >  mm/memory.c        | 26 +++++---------------------
> > >  mm/nommu.c         | 13 +------------
> > >  3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> > 
> > I think this is the right thing to do.
> 
> Was just about to smash this into the topic branch for testing in
> linux-next. Feel like an ack on the series, or at least the two mm
> patches?

Pushed them to my topic branch for a bit of testing in linux-next,
hopefully goes all fine for a pull for 5.13.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch