userfaultfd/shmem: support UFFDIO_CONTINUE for shmem
With this change, userspace can resolve a minor fault within a shmem-backed area with a UFFDIO_CONTINUE ioctl. The semantics for this match those for hugetlbfs - we look up the existing page in the page cache, and install a PTE for it. This commit introduces a new helper: mfill_atomic_install_pte. Why handle UFFDIO_CONTINUE for shmem in mm/userfaultfd.c, instead of in shmem.c? The existing userfault implementation only relies on shmem.c for VM_SHARED VMAs. However, minor fault handling / CONTINUE work just fine for !VM_SHARED VMAs as well. We'd prefer to handle CONTINUE for shmem in one place, regardless of shared/private (to reduce code duplication). Why add a new mfill_atomic_install_pte helper? A problem we have with continue is that shmem_mfill_atomic_pte() and mcopy_atomic_pte() are *close* to what we want, but not exactly. We do want to setup the PTEs in a CONTINUE operation, but we don't want to e.g. allocate a new page, charge it (e.g. to the shmem inode), manipulate various flags, etc. Also we have the problem stated above: shmem_mfill_atomic_pte() and mcopy_atomic_pte() both handle one-half of the problem (shared / private) continue cares about. So, introduce mcontinue_atomic_pte(), to handle all of the shmem continue cases. Introduce the helper so it doesn't duplicate code with mcopy_atomic_pte(). In a future commit, shmem_mfill_atomic_pte() will also be modified to use this new helper. However, since this is a bigger refactor, it seems most clear to do it as a separate change. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210503180737.2487560-5-axelrasmussen@google.com Signed-off-by:Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com> Acked-by: