From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>,
Nikita Kalyazin <kalyazin@amazon.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
Ujwal Kundur <ujwal.kundur@gmail.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
"Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] mm: Introduce vm_uffd_ops API
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 16:39:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ad124fb6-a712-4cf5-8a7e-2abacbc2e4be@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aN08NxRLz7Wx0Qh4@x1.local>
On 01.10.25 16:35, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 03:58:14PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>>> I briefly wondered whether we could use actual UFFD_FEATURE_* here, but they
>>>>>> are rather unsuited for this case here (e.g., different feature flags for
>>>>>> hugetlb support/shmem support etc).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But reading "uffd_ioctls" below, can't we derive the suitable vma flags from
>>>>>> the supported ioctls?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _UFFDIO_COPY | _UFDIO_ZEROPAGE -> VM_UFFD_MISSING
>>>>>> _UFFDIO_WRITEPROTECT -> VM_UFFD_WP
>>>>>> _UFFDIO_CONTINUE -> VM_UFFD_MINOR
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes we can deduce that, but it'll be unclear then when one stares at a
>>>>> bunch of ioctls and cannot easily digest the modes the memory type
>>>>> supports. Here, the modes should be the most straightforward way to
>>>>> describe the capability of a memory type.
>>>>
>>>> I rather dislike the current split approach between vm-flags and ioctls.
>>>>
>>>> I briefly thought about abstracting it for internal purposes further and
>>>> just have some internal backend ("memory type") flags.
>>>>
>>>> UFFD_BACKEND_FEAT_MISSING -> _UFFDIO_COPY and VM_UFFD_MISSING
>>>> UFFD_BACKEND_FEAT_ZEROPAGE -> _UFDIO_ZEROPAGE
>>>> UFFD_BACKEND_FEAT_WP -> _UFFDIO_WRITEPROTECT and VM_UFFD_WP
>>>> UFFD_BACKEND_FEAT_MINOR -> _UFFDIO_CONTINUE and VM_UFFD_MINOR
>>>> UFFD_BACKEND_FEAT_POISON -> _UFFDIO_POISON
>>>
>>> This layer of mapping can be helpful to some, but maybe confusing to
>>> others.. who is familiar with existing userfaultfd definitions.
>>>
>>
>> Just wondering, is this confusing to you, and if so, which part?
>>
>> To me it makes perfect sense and cleans up this API and not have to sets of
>> flags that are somehow interlinked.
>
> It adds the extra layer of mapping that will only be used in vm_uffd_ops
> and the helper that will consume it.
Agreed, while making the API cleaner. I don't easily see what's
confusing about that, though.
I think it can be done with a handful of LOC and avoid having to use VM_
flags in this API.
--
Cheers
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-01 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-26 21:16 [PATCH v3 0/4] mm/userfaultfd: modulize memory types Peter Xu
2025-09-26 21:16 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] mm: Introduce vm_uffd_ops API Peter Xu
2025-09-30 9:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-09-30 10:07 ` Mike Rapoport
2025-09-30 10:18 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-09-30 18:39 ` Peter Xu
2025-09-30 18:48 ` Peter Xu
2025-09-30 19:19 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-09-30 20:35 ` Peter Xu
2025-10-01 13:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-01 14:35 ` Peter Xu
2025-10-01 14:39 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2025-10-03 14:02 ` Peter Xu
2025-10-06 13:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-06 19:06 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-10-06 21:02 ` Peter Xu
2025-10-07 3:31 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-10-07 13:51 ` Peter Xu
2025-10-07 16:03 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-10-07 16:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-07 16:47 ` Peter Xu
2025-10-07 18:46 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-10-07 19:41 ` Peter Xu
2025-10-07 20:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-07 20:25 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-10-07 20:40 ` Peter Xu
2025-09-26 21:16 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] mm/shmem: Support " Peter Xu
2025-09-26 21:16 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] mm/hugetlb: " Peter Xu
2025-09-26 21:16 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] mm: Apply vm_uffd_ops API to core mm Peter Xu
2025-09-30 9:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-09-30 18:52 ` Peter Xu
2025-09-30 19:49 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] mm/userfaultfd: modulize memory types Liam R. Howlett
2025-09-30 20:45 ` Peter Xu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ad124fb6-a712-4cf5-8a7e-2abacbc2e4be@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=kalyazin@amazon.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=ujwal.kundur@gmail.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox