Re: [PATCH v4] mm/userfaultfd: detect VMA replacement after copy retry in mfill_copy_folio_retry()

[David CARLIER]

 Understood on all points. Will rework patch 1 to a simple ops
comparison with -ENOENT, drop vma_snapshot entirely. Will cc MEMORY
MAPPING folks.

  Holding off until after -rc1, will resend both then.

Cheers.

On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 at 05:02, Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 03:22:03PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> >
> > The other thing is I just noticed the err code was changed to -EINVAL for
> > snapshot changed cases, sorry I didn't follow previously as closely on the
> > discussion.  I think it should be -EAGAIN.  It's because the userapp can't
> > resolve -EINVAL failures and app will crash.  In a VMA change use case, we
> > should return -EAGAIN to imply the app to retry, rather than crashing.
>
> No. The return value should express that the VMA is invalid. -EINVAL could
> work, but looking now at the manual -ENOENT would be even better:
>
>        ENOENT (since Linux 4.11)
>               The faulting process has changed its virtual memory layout
>               simultaneously with an outstanding UFFDIO_COPY operation.
>
> > Thanks,
> > --
> > Peter Xu
>
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.