Re: [PATCH STABLE 5.10] mm/memory: add non-anonymous page check in the copy_present_page()

[David Hildenbrand]

On 28.10.22 03:32, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Reinstating Cc stable, which I removed just before the discussion settled.

Sorry for not reading the full thread before and considering Peters 
mail; I had to take short cuts :)

> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022, Peter Xu wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > After a re-read and 2nd thought, I think David has a valid point in that we
> > shouldn't have special handling of !anon pages on CoW during fork(),
> > because that seems to be against the fundamental concept of fork().
> >
> > So now I think I agree the !Anon original check does look a bit cleaner,
> > and also make fork() behavior matching with the old/new kernels, irrelevant
> > of the pin mess.
>
> Thanks Peter.  So Yuanzheng's patch for 5.10 is exactly right.
>
> Sorry for leading everyone astray: my mistake was to suppose that
> its !PageAnon check was simply to avoid the later BUG_ON(!anon_vma):
> whereas David and Peter now agree that it actually corrects the
> semantics for fork() on file pages.
>
> I lift my hold on Yuanzheng's patch: nobody actually said "Acked-by",
> but I think the discussion and resolution have given better than that.
> (No 3rd thoughts please!)

Unless someone tells me why I am obviously wrong

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>

--
Thanks,

David / dhildenb