Re: [PATCH net-next v11 0/6] introduce page_pool_alloc() related API
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Date: 2023-10-18 15:35:24
Also in:
bpf, linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek, lkml
On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 19:47:16 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote:
quoted
mention it in the documentation. Plus the kdoc of the function should say that this is just a thin wrapper around other page pool APIs, and it's safe to mix it with other page pool APIs?I am not sure I understand what do 'safe' and 'mix' mean here. For 'safe' part, I suppose you mean if there is a va accociated with a 'struct page' without calling some API like kmap()? For that, I suppose it is safe when the driver is calling page_pool API without the __GFP_HIGHMEM flag. Maybe we should mention that in the kdoc and give a warning if page_pool_*alloc_va() is called with the __GFP_HIGHMEM flag?
Sounds good. Warning wrapped in #if CONFIG_DEBUG_NET perhaps?
For the 'mix', I suppose you mean the below: 1. Allocate a page with the page_pool_*alloc_va() API and free a page with page_pool_free() API. 2. Allocate a page with the page_pool_*alloc() API and free a page with page_pool_free_va() API. For 1, it seems it is ok as some virt_to_head_page() and page_address() call between va and 'struct page' does not seem to change anything if we have enforce page_pool_*alloc_va() to be called without the __GFP_HIGHMEM flag. For 2, If the va is returned from page_address() which the allocation API is called without __GFP_HIGHMEM flag. If not, the va is from kmap*()? which means we may be calling page_pool_free_va() before kunmap*()? Is that possible?
Right, if someone passes kmap()'ed address they are trying quite hard to break their own driver. Technically possible but I wouldn't worry. I just mean that in the common case of non-HIGHMEM page, calling page_pool_free_va() with the address returned by page_address() is perfectly legal.