Re: [PATCH v11 6/8] mm: rust: add VmAreaNew for f_ops->mmap()

[Alice Ryhl]

On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 3:51 PM Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > This type will be used when setting up a new vma in an f_ops->mmap()
> > hook. Using a separate type from VmAreaRef allows us to have a separate
> > set of operations that you are only able to use during the mmap() hook.
> > For example, the VM_MIXEDMAP flag must not be changed after the initial
> > setup that happens during the f_ops->mmap() hook.
> >
> > To avoid setting invalid flag values, the methods for clearing
> > VM_MAYWRITE and similar involve a check of VM_WRITE, and return an error
> > if VM_WRITE is set. Trying to use `try_clear_maywrite` without checking
> > the return value results in a compilation error because the `Result`
> > type is marked #[must_use].
> >
> > For now, there's only a method for VM_MIXEDMAP and not VM_PFNMAP. When
> > we add a VM_PFNMAP method, we will need some way to prevent you from
> > setting both VM_MIXEDMAP and VM_PFNMAP on the same vma.
> >
> > Acked-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> (for mm bits)
> > Reviewed-by: Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  rust/kernel/mm/virt.rs | 181 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 180 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/rust/kernel/mm/virt.rs b/rust/kernel/mm/virt.rs
> > index 3a23854e14f4..6d9ba56d4f95 100644
> > --- a/rust/kernel/mm/virt.rs
> > +++ b/rust/kernel/mm/virt.rs
> > @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
> >
> >  use crate::{
> >      bindings,
> > -    error::{to_result, Result},
> > +    error::{code::EINVAL, to_result, Result},
> >      mm::MmWithUser,
> >      page::Page,
> >      types::Opaque,
> > @@ -171,6 +171,185 @@ pub fn vm_insert_page(&self, address: usize, page: &Page) -> Result {
> >      }
> >  }
> >
> > +/// A builder for setting up a vma in an `f_ops->mmap()` hook.
>
> Reading this line, I would expect to be able to chain update methods as
> in `Builder::new().prop_a().prop_b().build()`. Could/should this type
> accommodate a proper builder pattern? Or is "builder" not the right word
> to use here?

You cannot create values of this type yourself. Only the C
infrastructure can do so.

What would you call it if not "builder"?

Alice