On 2019/9/5 2:48, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:24:58 +0200 Vlastimil Babka <vba...@suse.cz> wrote:
>
>> On 9/4/19 12:26 PM, zhong jiang wrote:
>>> With the help of unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci. Unsigned 'nr_pages"'
>>> compare with zero. And __get_user_pages_locked will return an long value.
>>> Hence, Convert the long to compare with zero is feasible.
>> It would be nicer if the parameter nr_pages was long again instead of 
>> unsigned
>> long (note there are two variants of the function, so both should be 
>> changed).
> nr_pages should be unsigned - it's a count of pages!
>
> The bug is that __get_user_pages_locked() returns a signed long which
> can be a -ve errno.
>
> I think it's best if __get_user_pages_locked() is to get itself a new
> local with the same type as its return value.  Something like:
>
> --- a/mm/gup.c~a
> +++ a/mm/gup.c
> @@ -1450,6 +1450,7 @@ static long check_and_migrate_cma_pages(
>       bool drain_allow = true;
>       bool migrate_allow = true;
>       LIST_HEAD(cma_page_list);
> +     long ret;
>  
>  check_again:
>       for (i = 0; i < nr_pages;) {
> @@ -1511,17 +1512,18 @@ check_again:
>                * again migrating any new CMA pages which we failed to isolate
>                * earlier.
>                */
> -             nr_pages = __get_user_pages_locked(tsk, mm, start, nr_pages,
> +             ret = __get_user_pages_locked(tsk, mm, start, nr_pages,
>                                                  pages, vmas, NULL,
>                                                  gup_flags);
>  
> -             if ((nr_pages > 0) && migrate_allow) {
> +             nr_pages = ret;
> +             if (ret > 0 && migrate_allow) {
>                       drain_allow = true;
>                       goto check_again;
>               }
>       }
>  
> -     return nr_pages;
> +     return ret;
>  }
>  #else
>  static long check_and_migrate_cma_pages(struct task_struct *tsk,
Firstly,  I consider the some modified method as you has writen down above.  It 
seems to work well.
According to Vlastimil's feedback,   I repost the patch in v2,   changing the 
parameter to long to fix
the issue.  which one do you prefer?

Thanks,
zhong jiang

Reply via email to