From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 13:39:54 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: Generalize notify_page_fault() Message-Id: <20190530133954.GA2024@bombadil.infradead.org> List-Id: References: <1559195713-6956-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20190530110639.GC23461@bombadil.infradead.org> <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Mark Rutland , Michal Hocko , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , linux-mm@kvack.org, Paul Mackerras , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Yoshinori Sato , Michael Ellerman , Russell King , Fenghua Yu , Stephen Rothwell , Andrey Konovalov , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Christophe Leroy , Tony Luck , Heiko Carstens , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Martin Schwidefsky , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:31:15PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 05/30/2019 04:36 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > The two handle preemption differently. Why is x86 wrong and this one > > correct? > > Here it expects context to be already non-preemptible where as the proposed > generic function makes it non-preemptible with a preempt_[disable|enable]() > pair for the required code section, irrespective of it's present state. Is > not this better ? git log -p arch/x86/mm/fault.c search for 'kprobes'. tell me what you think. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDC0BC28CC0 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:39:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9947259B4 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:39:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="cO8H1JSN" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727020AbfE3Nj7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 May 2019 09:39:59 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:36316 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725919AbfE3Nj6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 May 2019 09:39:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=1z2R00tGmVK2jShz09WQ0aSl4fghOklhUmq3MkzmZGo=; b=cO8H1JSNfCwyIOlnTHicp8Zhy tdZp1B1hNurTw3WgAzPBczTGKcSpIkF2nUeFXWFXbacSglBjt8yYhoxBpvJQd2bkSo8SPeHDMVlbk AmGm77WpHy+tChpRqlM72RL0yDXaK+gT4W1Kljnz/VQ/KVDugsJZ0Tc/HFFB2pHCUi7WQ8dCXvAcZ squPNwIZONWngjyh6R0Q/O1CiEId8WQLaglsMjfxroLiY82v0UZBHk7vWS3/3ejIRWejmUyHZlDM1 gPiCoTWkidUnsD2jvuDxMSsXlKB3TaOPHa9W0ihPAK8uyAmomCO3ELcq+JfaA9MCjatOQ5PlCd63o jpySg/rQw==; Received: from willy by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hWLHe-0001vX-Pd; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:39:54 +0000 Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 06:39:54 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Mark Rutland , Christophe Leroy , Stephen Rothwell , Andrey Konovalov , Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Russell King , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Tony Luck , Fenghua Yu , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Yoshinori Sato , "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: Generalize notify_page_fault() Message-ID: <20190530133954.GA2024@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <1559195713-6956-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20190530110639.GC23461@bombadil.infradead.org> <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:31:15PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 05/30/2019 04:36 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > The two handle preemption differently. Why is x86 wrong and this one > > correct? > > Here it expects context to be already non-preemptible where as the proposed > generic function makes it non-preemptible with a preempt_[disable|enable]() > pair for the required code section, irrespective of it's present state. Is > not this better ? git log -p arch/x86/mm/fault.c search for 'kprobes'. tell me what you think. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 06:39:54 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: Generalize notify_page_fault() Message-ID: <20190530133954.GA2024@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <1559195713-6956-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20190530110639.GC23461@bombadil.infradead.org> <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org List-Archive: To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Mark Rutland , Michal Hocko , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , linux-mm@kvack.org, Paul Mackerras , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Yoshinori Sato , Michael Ellerman , Russell King , Fenghua Yu , Stephen Rothwell , Andrey Konovalov , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Christophe Leroy , Tony Luck , Heiko Carstens , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Martin Schwidefsky , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" List-ID: On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:31:15PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 05/30/2019 04:36 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > The two handle preemption differently. Why is x86 wrong and this one > > correct? > > Here it expects context to be already non-preemptible where as the proposed > generic function makes it non-preemptible with a preempt_[disable|enable]() > pair for the required code section, irrespective of it's present state. Is > not this better ? git log -p arch/x86/mm/fault.c search for 'kprobes'. tell me what you think. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4507BC28CC0 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E6B8259D7 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:45:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="cO8H1JSN" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8E6B8259D7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F83v2H85zDqSQ for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 23:45:47 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org (client-ip=2607:7c80:54:e::133; helo=bombadil.infradead.org; envelope-from=willy@infradead.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="cO8H1JSN"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:e::133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45F7xH3rhnzDqQL for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 23:40:02 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=1z2R00tGmVK2jShz09WQ0aSl4fghOklhUmq3MkzmZGo=; b=cO8H1JSNfCwyIOlnTHicp8Zhy tdZp1B1hNurTw3WgAzPBczTGKcSpIkF2nUeFXWFXbacSglBjt8yYhoxBpvJQd2bkSo8SPeHDMVlbk AmGm77WpHy+tChpRqlM72RL0yDXaK+gT4W1Kljnz/VQ/KVDugsJZ0Tc/HFFB2pHCUi7WQ8dCXvAcZ squPNwIZONWngjyh6R0Q/O1CiEId8WQLaglsMjfxroLiY82v0UZBHk7vWS3/3ejIRWejmUyHZlDM1 gPiCoTWkidUnsD2jvuDxMSsXlKB3TaOPHa9W0ihPAK8uyAmomCO3ELcq+JfaA9MCjatOQ5PlCd63o jpySg/rQw==; Received: from willy by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hWLHe-0001vX-Pd; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:39:54 +0000 Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 06:39:54 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Anshuman Khandual Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: Generalize notify_page_fault() Message-ID: <20190530133954.GA2024@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <1559195713-6956-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20190530110639.GC23461@bombadil.infradead.org> <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4f9a610d-e856-60f6-4467-09e9c3836771@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Michal Hocko , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , linux-mm@kvack.org, Paul Mackerras , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Yoshinori Sato , Russell King , Fenghua Yu , Stephen Rothwell , Andrey Konovalov , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Tony Luck , Heiko Carstens , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Martin Schwidefsky , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:31:15PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 05/30/2019 04:36 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > The two handle preemption differently. Why is x86 wrong and this one > > correct? > > Here it expects context to be already non-preemptible where as the proposed > generic function makes it non-preemptible with a preempt_[disable|enable]() > pair for the required code section, irrespective of it's present state. Is > not this better ? git log -p arch/x86/mm/fault.c search for 'kprobes'. tell me what you think.