On Thu, Apr 02, 2026 at 07:11:52AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <[email protected]> > > Since __mfill_atomic_pte() handles the retry for both anonymous and shmem, > there is no need to retry copying the date from the userspace in the loop > in mfill_atomic(). > > Drop the retry logic from mfill_atomic(). > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[email protected]> > --- > mm/userfaultfd.c | 24 ------------------------ > 1 file changed, 24 deletions(-)
After discussion with David Carlier about potential replacement of VMA in mfill_copy_folio_retry(), I looked again in the code and realized that after all the rebases I didn't remove the bit that temporarily prevented returning ENOENT from __mfill_atomic_pte(). Andrew, can you please fold this into "userfaultfd: mfill_atomic(): remove retry logic"? For a change it applies cleanly :) commit 5173c8f4fd32f314907b3804217ef57d4e3a2220 Author: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[email protected]> Date: Thu Apr 2 16:38:39 2026 +0300 userfaultfd: remove safety mesaure of not returning ENOENT from _copy Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <[email protected]> diff --git a/mm/userfaultfd.c b/mm/userfaultfd.c index 935a3f6ebeed..dfd7094b1c40 100644 --- a/mm/userfaultfd.c +++ b/mm/userfaultfd.c @@ -530,9 +530,6 @@ static int __mfill_atomic_pte(struct mfill_state *state, ops->filemap_remove(folio, state->vma); err_folio_put: folio_put(folio); - /* Don't return -ENOENT so that our caller won't retry */ - if (ret == -ENOENT) - ret = -EFAULT; return ret; } -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
