On 7/16/26 11:35, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
> On 14/07/2026 16:03, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
>> index d5e87624f692..c0244c0b0756 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory.c
>> @@ -3394,13 +3394,13 @@ static int apply_to_pte_range(struct mm_struct *mm,
>> pmd_t *pmd,
>> spinlock_t *ptl;
>>
>> if (create) {
>> - mapped_pte = pte = (mm == &init_mm) ?
>> + mapped_pte = pte = mm_is_kernel(mm) ?
>> pte_alloc_kernel_track(pmd, addr, mask) :
>> pte_alloc_map_lock(mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
>
> As noted by Sashiko, this is a little problematic because if
> apply_to_page_range() is called on efi_mm, then we will end up with
> __pte_alloc_kernel() taking the init_mm lock, since that's hardcoded.
>
> That probably means we should pass the mm to __pte_alloc_kernel().
Agreed.
I guess we have to audit all existing init_mm usage?
--
Cheers,
David
