On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 03:52:38PM -0700, Axel Rasmussen wrote:

With this change, userspace can resolve a minor fault within a
shmem-backed area with a UFFDIO_CONTINUE ioctl. The semantics for this
match those for hugetlbfs - we look up the existing page in the page
cache, and install a PTE for it.

This commit introduces a new helper: mcopy_atomic_install_pte.

Why handle UFFDIO_CONTINUE for shmem in mm/userfaultfd.c, instead of in
shmem.c? The existing userfault implementation only relies on shmem.c
for VM_SHARED VMAs. However, minor fault handling / CONTINUE work just
fine for !VM_SHARED VMAs as well. We'd prefer to handle CONTINUE for
shmem in one place, regardless of shared/private (to reduce code
duplication).

Why add a new mcopy_atomic_install_pte helper? A problem we have with
continue is that shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte() and mcopy_atomic_pte() are
*close* to what we want, but not exactly. We do want to setup the PTEs
in a CONTINUE operation, but we don't want to e.g. allocate a new page,
charge it (e.g. to the shmem inode), manipulate various flags, etc. Also
we have the problem stated above: shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte() and
mcopy_atomic_pte() both handle one-half of the problem (shared /
private) continue cares about. So, introduce mcontinue_atomic_pte(), to
handle all of the shmem continue cases. Introduce the helper so it
doesn't duplicate code with mcopy_atomic_pte().

In a future commit, shmem_mcopy_atomic_pte() will also be modified to
use this new helper. However, since this is a bigger refactor, it seems
most clear to do it as a separate change.

Signed-off-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>

Acked-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>

-- 
Peter Xu