[PATCH v12 10/11] powerpc: mm: Use set_pte_at_unchecked() for early-boot / internal usages
Pasha Tatashin
pasha.tatashin at soleen.com
Wed Apr 3 17:12:07 PDT 2024
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 1:13 AM Rohan McLure <rmclure at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> In the new set_ptes() API, set_pte_at() (a special case of set_ptes())
> is intended to be instrumented by the page table check facility. There
> are however several other routines that constitute the API for setting
> page table entries, including set_pmd_at() among others. Such routines
> are themselves implemented in terms of set_ptes_at().
>
> A future patch providing support for page table checking on powerpc
> must take care to avoid duplicate calls to
> page_table_check_p{te,md,ud}_set(). Allow for assignment of pte entries
> without instrumentation through the set_pte_at_unchecked() routine
> introduced in this patch.
>
> Cause API-facing routines that call set_pte_at() to instead call
> set_pte_at_unchecked(), which will remain uninstrumented by page
> table check. set_ptes() is itself implemented by calls to
> __set_pte_at(), so this eliminates redundant code.
>
> Also prefer set_pte_at_unchecked() in early-boot usages which should not be
> instrumented.
Would not the early-boot usage be all kernel mappings that are ignored
by page table check anways? Sounds like it is better to only use the
set_pte_at_unchecked() version where it is really needed, which is to
avoid double counting. This will keep the usage of this function only
for one purpose that is easy to follow.
Pasha
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list