On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 08:50:20AM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:

Le 13/03/2024 à 22:47, peterx@redhat.com a écrit :

quoted

From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>

Now after we're sure all pXd_huge() definitions are the same as pXd_leaf(),
reuse it.  Luckily, pXd_huge() isn't widely used.

Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
---
  arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h | 2 +-
  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h      | 2 +-
  arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c           | 4 ++--
  arch/loongarch/mm/hugetlbpage.c       | 2 +-
  arch/mips/mm/tlb-r4k.c                | 2 +-
  arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable_64.c          | 6 +++---
  arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c                 | 4 ++--
  mm/gup.c                              | 4 ++--
  mm/hmm.c                              | 2 +-
  mm/memory.c                           | 2 +-
  10 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h
index e7aecbef75c9..9e3c44f0aea2 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h

@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static inline pte_t pte_mkspecial(pte_t pte)
  #define pmd_dirty(pmd)		(pmd_isset((pmd), L_PMD_SECT_DIRTY))
  
  #define pmd_hugewillfault(pmd)	(!pmd_young(pmd) || !pmd_write(pmd))
-#define pmd_thp_or_huge(pmd)	(pmd_huge(pmd) || pmd_trans_huge(pmd))
+#define pmd_thp_or_huge(pmd)	(pmd_leaf(pmd) || pmd_trans_huge(pmd))

Previous patch said pmd_trans_huge() implies pmd_leaf().

Ah here I remember I kept this arm definition there because I think we
should add a patch to drop pmd_thp_or_huge() completely.  If you won't mind
I can add one more patch instead of doing it here.  Then I keep this patch
purely as a replacement patch without further changes on arch-cleanups.

Or is that only for GUP ?

I think it should apply to all.

quoted

  
  #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
  #define pmd_trans_huge(pmd)	(pmd_val(pmd) && !pmd_table(pmd))

quoted

diff --git a/mm/hmm.c b/mm/hmm.c
index c95b9ec5d95f..93aebd9cc130 100644
--- a/mm/hmm.c
+++ b/mm/hmm.c

@@ -429,7 +429,7 @@ static int hmm_vma_walk_pud(pud_t *pudp, unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
  		return hmm_vma_walk_hole(start, end, -1, walk);
  	}
  
-	if (pud_huge(pud) && pud_devmap(pud)) {
+	if (pud_leaf(pud) && pud_devmap(pud)) {

Didn't previous patch say devmap implies leaf ? Or is it only for GUP ?

This is an extra safety check that I didn't remove.  Devmap used separate
bits even though I'm not clear on why.  It should still imply a leaf though.

Thanks,

quoted

  		unsigned long i, npages, pfn;
  		unsigned int required_fault;
  		unsigned long *hmm_pfns;

-- 
Peter Xu