1 files changed, 136 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/include/linux/mm_inline.h b/include/linux/mm_inline.h
index e2ec68b0515c..b725839dfe71 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm_inline.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm_inline.h
@@ -2,8 +2,10 @@
 #ifndef LINUX_MM_INLINE_H
 #define LINUX_MM_INLINE_H
 
+#include <linux/atomic.h>
 #include <linux/huge_mm.h>
 #include <linux/swap.h>
+#include <linux/string.h>
 
 /**
  * folio_is_file_lru - Should the folio be on a file LRU or anon LRU?
@@ -135,4 +137,138 @@ static __always_inline void del_page_from_lru_list(struct page *page,
 {
 	lruvec_del_folio(lruvec, page_folio(page));
 }
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_ANON_VMA_NAME
+/*
+ * mmap_lock should be read-locked when calling vma_anon_name() and while using
+ * the returned pointer.
+ */
+extern const char *vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *vma);
+
+/*
+ * mmap_lock should be read-locked for orig_vma->vm_mm.
+ * mmap_lock should be write-locked for new_vma->vm_mm or new_vma should be
+ * isolated.
+ */
+extern void dup_vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *orig_vma,
+			      struct vm_area_struct *new_vma);
+
+/*
+ * mmap_lock should be write-locked or vma should have been isolated under
+ * write-locked mmap_lock protection.
+ */
+extern void free_vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *vma);
+
+/* mmap_lock should be read-locked */
+static inline bool is_same_vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+					 const char *name)
+{
+	const char *vma_name = vma_anon_name(vma);
+
+	/* either both NULL, or pointers to same string */
+	if (vma_name == name)
+		return true;
+
+	return name && vma_name && !strcmp(name, vma_name);
+}
+#else /* CONFIG_ANON_VMA_NAME */
+static inline const char *vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
+{
+	return NULL;
+}
+static inline void dup_vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *orig_vma,
+			      struct vm_area_struct *new_vma) {}
+static inline void free_vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *vma) {}
+static inline bool is_same_vma_anon_name(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+					 const char *name)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+#endif  /* CONFIG_ANON_VMA_NAME */
+
+static inline void init_tlb_flush_pending(struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
+	atomic_set(&mm->tlb_flush_pending, 0);
+}
+
+static inline void inc_tlb_flush_pending(struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
+	atomic_inc(&mm->tlb_flush_pending);
+	/*
+	 * The only time this value is relevant is when there are indeed pages
+	 * to flush. And we'll only flush pages after changing them, which
+	 * requires the PTL.
+	 *
+	 * So the ordering here is:
+	 *
+	 *	atomic_inc(&mm->tlb_flush_pending);
+	 *	spin_lock(&ptl);
+	 *	...
+	 *	set_pte_at();
+	 *	spin_unlock(&ptl);
+	 *
+	 *				spin_lock(&ptl)
+	 *				mm_tlb_flush_pending();
+	 *				....
+	 *				spin_unlock(&ptl);
+	 *
+	 *	flush_tlb_range();
+	 *	atomic_dec(&mm->tlb_flush_pending);
+	 *
+	 * Where the increment if constrained by the PTL unlock, it thus
+	 * ensures that the increment is visible if the PTE modification is
+	 * visible. After all, if there is no PTE modification, nobody cares
+	 * about TLB flushes either.
+	 *
+	 * This very much relies on users (mm_tlb_flush_pending() and
+	 * mm_tlb_flush_nested()) only caring about _specific_ PTEs (and
+	 * therefore specific PTLs), because with SPLIT_PTE_PTLOCKS and RCpc
+	 * locks (PPC) the unlock of one doesn't order against the lock of
+	 * another PTL.
+	 *
+	 * The decrement is ordered by the flush_tlb_range(), such that
+	 * mm_tlb_flush_pending() will not return false unless all flushes have
+	 * completed.
+	 */
+}
+
+static inline void dec_tlb_flush_pending(struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
+	/*
+	 * See inc_tlb_flush_pending().
+	 *
+	 * This cannot be smp_mb__before_atomic() because smp_mb() simply does
+	 * not order against TLB invalidate completion, which is what we need.
+	 *
+	 * Therefore we must rely on tlb_flush_*() to guarantee order.
+	 */
+	atomic_dec(&mm->tlb_flush_pending);
+}
+
+static inline bool mm_tlb_flush_pending(struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
+	/*
+	 * Must be called after having acquired the PTL; orders against that
+	 * PTLs release and therefore ensures that if we observe the modified
+	 * PTE we must also observe the increment from inc_tlb_flush_pending().
+	 *
+	 * That is, it only guarantees to return true if there is a flush
+	 * pending for _this_ PTL.
+	 */
+	return atomic_read(&mm->tlb_flush_pending);
+}
+
+static inline bool mm_tlb_flush_nested(struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
+	/*
+	 * Similar to mm_tlb_flush_pending(), we must have acquired the PTL
+	 * for which there is a TLB flush pending in order to guarantee
+	 * we've seen both that PTE modification and the increment.
+	 *
+	 * (no requirement on actually still holding the PTL, that is irrelevant)
+	 */
+	return atomic_read(&mm->tlb_flush_pending) > 1;
+}
+
+
 #endif