All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andrew Hunter <ahh@google.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>,
	rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 for 4.15 08/14] Provide cpu_opv system call
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 02:40:37 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <444885121.6172.1510022437259.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171107020711.GA6095@tardis>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1052 bytes --]

----- On Nov 6, 2017, at 9:07 PM, Boqun Feng boqun.feng@gmail.com wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 03:56:38PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> [...]
>> +static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
>> +		struct page ***pinned_pages_ptr, size_t *nr_pinned,
>> +		int write)
>> +{
>> +	struct page *pages[2];
>> +	int ret, nr_pages;
>> +
>> +	if (!len)
>> +		return 0;
>> +	nr_pages = cpu_op_range_nr_pages(addr, len);
>> +	BUG_ON(nr_pages > 2);
>> +	if (*nr_pinned + nr_pages > NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK) {
> 
> Is this a bug? Seems you will kzalloc() every time if *nr_pinned is
> bigger than NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK, which will result in memory
> leaking.
> 
> I think the logic here is complex enough for us to introduce a
> structure, like:
> 
>	struct cpu_opv_page_pinner {
>		int nr_pinned;
>		bool is_kmalloc;
>		struct page **pinned_pages;
>	};
> 
> Thoughts?

Good catch !

How about the attached diff ? I'll fold it into the rseq/dev tree.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: fix-cpu-opv-leak.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch; name=fix-cpu-opv-leak.patch, Size: 5793 bytes --]

diff --git a/kernel/cpu_opv.c b/kernel/cpu_opv.c
index 09754bbe6a4f..3d8fd66416a0 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu_opv.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu_opv.c
@@ -46,6 +46,12 @@ union op_fn_data {
 #endif
 };
 
+struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages {
+	struct page **pages;
+	size_t nr;
+	bool is_kmalloc;
+};
+
 typedef int (*op_fn_t)(union op_fn_data *data, uint64_t v, uint32_t len);
 
 static DEFINE_MUTEX(cpu_opv_offline_lock);
@@ -217,8 +223,7 @@ static int cpu_op_check_pages(struct page **pages,
 }
 
 static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
-		struct page ***pinned_pages_ptr, size_t *nr_pinned,
-		int write)
+		struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages *pin_pages, int write)
 {
 	struct page *pages[2];
 	int ret, nr_pages;
@@ -227,15 +232,17 @@ static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
 		return 0;
 	nr_pages = cpu_op_range_nr_pages(addr, len);
 	BUG_ON(nr_pages > 2);
-	if (*nr_pinned + nr_pages > NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK) {
+	if (!pin_pages->is_kmalloc && pin_pages->nr + nr_pages
+			> NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK) {
 		struct page **pinned_pages =
 			kzalloc(CPU_OP_VEC_LEN_MAX * CPU_OP_MAX_PAGES
 				* sizeof(struct page *), GFP_KERNEL);
 		if (!pinned_pages)
 			return -ENOMEM;
-		memcpy(pinned_pages, *pinned_pages_ptr,
-			*nr_pinned * sizeof(struct page *));
-		*pinned_pages_ptr = pinned_pages;
+		memcpy(pinned_pages, pin_pages->pages,
+			pin_pages->nr * sizeof(struct page *));
+		pin_pages->pages = pinned_pages;
+		pin_pages->is_kmalloc = true;
 	}
 again:
 	ret = get_user_pages_fast(addr, nr_pages, write, pages);
@@ -257,9 +264,9 @@ static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
 	}
 	if (ret)
 		goto error;
-	(*pinned_pages_ptr)[(*nr_pinned)++] = pages[0];
+	pin_pages->pages[pin_pages->nr++] = pages[0];
 	if (nr_pages > 1)
-		(*pinned_pages_ptr)[(*nr_pinned)++] = pages[1];
+		pin_pages->pages[pin_pages->nr++] = pages[1];
 	return 0;
 
 error:
@@ -270,7 +277,7 @@ static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
 }
 
 static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
-		struct page ***pinned_pages_ptr, size_t *nr_pinned)
+		struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages *pin_pages)
 {
 	int ret, i;
 	bool expect_fault = false;
@@ -289,7 +296,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.compare_op.a,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 0);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 0);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			ret = -EFAULT;
@@ -299,7 +306,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.compare_op.b,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 0);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 0);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -311,7 +318,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.memcpy_op.dst,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			ret = -EFAULT;
@@ -321,7 +328,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.memcpy_op.src,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 0);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 0);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -333,7 +340,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.arithmetic_op.p,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -347,7 +354,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.bitwise_op.p,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -360,7 +367,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.shift_op.p,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -373,9 +380,9 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 	return 0;
 
 error:
-	for (i = 0; i < *nr_pinned; i++)
-		put_page((*pinned_pages_ptr)[i]);
-	*nr_pinned = 0;
+	for (i = 0; i < pin_pages->nr; i++)
+		put_page(pin_pages->pages[i]);
+	pin_pages->nr = 0;
 	/*
 	 * If faulting access is expected, return EAGAIN to user-space.
 	 * It allows user-space to distinguish between a fault caused by
@@ -923,9 +930,12 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(cpu_opv, struct cpu_op __user *, ucpuopv, int, cpuopcnt,
 {
 	struct cpu_op cpuopv[CPU_OP_VEC_LEN_MAX];
 	struct page *pinned_pages_on_stack[NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK];
-	struct page **pinned_pages = pinned_pages_on_stack;
+	struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages pin_pages = {
+		.pages = pinned_pages_on_stack,
+		.nr = 0,
+		.is_kmalloc = false,
+	};
 	int ret, i;
-	size_t nr_pinned = 0;
 
 	if (unlikely(flags))
 		return -EINVAL;
@@ -938,15 +948,14 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(cpu_opv, struct cpu_op __user *, ucpuopv, int, cpuopcnt,
 	ret = cpu_opv_check(cpuopv, cpuopcnt);
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
-	ret = cpu_opv_pin_pages(cpuopv, cpuopcnt,
-				&pinned_pages, &nr_pinned);
+	ret = cpu_opv_pin_pages(cpuopv, cpuopcnt, &pin_pages);
 	if (ret)
 		goto end;
 	ret = do_cpu_opv(cpuopv, cpuopcnt, cpu);
-	for (i = 0; i < nr_pinned; i++)
-		put_page(pinned_pages[i]);
+	for (i = 0; i < pin_pages.nr; i++)
+		put_page(pin_pages.pages[i]);
 end:
-	if (pinned_pages != pinned_pages_on_stack)
-		kfree(pinned_pages);
+	if (pin_pages.is_kmalloc)
+		kfree(pin_pages.pages);
 	return ret;
 }

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney"
	<paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto-kltTT9wpgjJwATOyAt5JVQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Dave Watson <davejwatson-b10kYP2dOMg@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-kernel
	<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-api <linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	Paul Turner <pjt-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Andrew Morton
	<akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>,
	Russell King <linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Andrew Hunter <ahh-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi-Vw/NltI1exuRpAAqCnN02g@public.gmane.org>,
	Chris Lameter <cl-vYTEC60ixJUAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Ben Maurer <bmaurer-b10kYP2dOMg@public.gmane.org>,
	rostedt <rostedt-nx8X9YLhiw1AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh-iaAMLnmF4UmaiuxdJuQwMA@public.gmane.org>,
	Linus Torvalds
	<torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 for 4.15 08/14] Provide cpu_opv system call
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 02:40:37 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <444885121.6172.1510022437259.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171107020711.GA6095@tardis>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1082 bytes --]

----- On Nov 6, 2017, at 9:07 PM, Boqun Feng boqun.feng-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 03:56:38PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> [...]
>> +static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
>> +		struct page ***pinned_pages_ptr, size_t *nr_pinned,
>> +		int write)
>> +{
>> +	struct page *pages[2];
>> +	int ret, nr_pages;
>> +
>> +	if (!len)
>> +		return 0;
>> +	nr_pages = cpu_op_range_nr_pages(addr, len);
>> +	BUG_ON(nr_pages > 2);
>> +	if (*nr_pinned + nr_pages > NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK) {
> 
> Is this a bug? Seems you will kzalloc() every time if *nr_pinned is
> bigger than NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK, which will result in memory
> leaking.
> 
> I think the logic here is complex enough for us to introduce a
> structure, like:
> 
>	struct cpu_opv_page_pinner {
>		int nr_pinned;
>		bool is_kmalloc;
>		struct page **pinned_pages;
>	};
> 
> Thoughts?

Good catch !

How about the attached diff ? I'll fold it into the rseq/dev tree.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: fix-cpu-opv-leak.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch; name=fix-cpu-opv-leak.patch, Size: 5793 bytes --]

diff --git a/kernel/cpu_opv.c b/kernel/cpu_opv.c
index 09754bbe6a4f..3d8fd66416a0 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu_opv.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu_opv.c
@@ -46,6 +46,12 @@ union op_fn_data {
 #endif
 };
 
+struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages {
+	struct page **pages;
+	size_t nr;
+	bool is_kmalloc;
+};
+
 typedef int (*op_fn_t)(union op_fn_data *data, uint64_t v, uint32_t len);
 
 static DEFINE_MUTEX(cpu_opv_offline_lock);
@@ -217,8 +223,7 @@ static int cpu_op_check_pages(struct page **pages,
 }
 
 static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
-		struct page ***pinned_pages_ptr, size_t *nr_pinned,
-		int write)
+		struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages *pin_pages, int write)
 {
 	struct page *pages[2];
 	int ret, nr_pages;
@@ -227,15 +232,17 @@ static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
 		return 0;
 	nr_pages = cpu_op_range_nr_pages(addr, len);
 	BUG_ON(nr_pages > 2);
-	if (*nr_pinned + nr_pages > NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK) {
+	if (!pin_pages->is_kmalloc && pin_pages->nr + nr_pages
+			> NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK) {
 		struct page **pinned_pages =
 			kzalloc(CPU_OP_VEC_LEN_MAX * CPU_OP_MAX_PAGES
 				* sizeof(struct page *), GFP_KERNEL);
 		if (!pinned_pages)
 			return -ENOMEM;
-		memcpy(pinned_pages, *pinned_pages_ptr,
-			*nr_pinned * sizeof(struct page *));
-		*pinned_pages_ptr = pinned_pages;
+		memcpy(pinned_pages, pin_pages->pages,
+			pin_pages->nr * sizeof(struct page *));
+		pin_pages->pages = pinned_pages;
+		pin_pages->is_kmalloc = true;
 	}
 again:
 	ret = get_user_pages_fast(addr, nr_pages, write, pages);
@@ -257,9 +264,9 @@ static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
 	}
 	if (ret)
 		goto error;
-	(*pinned_pages_ptr)[(*nr_pinned)++] = pages[0];
+	pin_pages->pages[pin_pages->nr++] = pages[0];
 	if (nr_pages > 1)
-		(*pinned_pages_ptr)[(*nr_pinned)++] = pages[1];
+		pin_pages->pages[pin_pages->nr++] = pages[1];
 	return 0;
 
 error:
@@ -270,7 +277,7 @@ static int cpu_op_pin_pages(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
 }
 
 static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
-		struct page ***pinned_pages_ptr, size_t *nr_pinned)
+		struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages *pin_pages)
 {
 	int ret, i;
 	bool expect_fault = false;
@@ -289,7 +296,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.compare_op.a,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 0);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 0);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			ret = -EFAULT;
@@ -299,7 +306,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.compare_op.b,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 0);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 0);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -311,7 +318,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.memcpy_op.dst,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			ret = -EFAULT;
@@ -321,7 +328,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.memcpy_op.src,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 0);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 0);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -333,7 +340,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.arithmetic_op.p,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -347,7 +354,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.bitwise_op.p,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -360,7 +367,7 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 				goto error;
 			ret = cpu_op_pin_pages(
 					(unsigned long)op->u.shift_op.p,
-					op->len, pinned_pages_ptr, nr_pinned, 1);
+					op->len, pin_pages, 1);
 			if (ret)
 				goto error;
 			break;
@@ -373,9 +380,9 @@ static int cpu_opv_pin_pages(struct cpu_op *cpuop, int cpuopcnt,
 	return 0;
 
 error:
-	for (i = 0; i < *nr_pinned; i++)
-		put_page((*pinned_pages_ptr)[i]);
-	*nr_pinned = 0;
+	for (i = 0; i < pin_pages->nr; i++)
+		put_page(pin_pages->pages[i]);
+	pin_pages->nr = 0;
 	/*
 	 * If faulting access is expected, return EAGAIN to user-space.
 	 * It allows user-space to distinguish between a fault caused by
@@ -923,9 +930,12 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(cpu_opv, struct cpu_op __user *, ucpuopv, int, cpuopcnt,
 {
 	struct cpu_op cpuopv[CPU_OP_VEC_LEN_MAX];
 	struct page *pinned_pages_on_stack[NR_PINNED_PAGES_ON_STACK];
-	struct page **pinned_pages = pinned_pages_on_stack;
+	struct cpu_opv_pinned_pages pin_pages = {
+		.pages = pinned_pages_on_stack,
+		.nr = 0,
+		.is_kmalloc = false,
+	};
 	int ret, i;
-	size_t nr_pinned = 0;
 
 	if (unlikely(flags))
 		return -EINVAL;
@@ -938,15 +948,14 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(cpu_opv, struct cpu_op __user *, ucpuopv, int, cpuopcnt,
 	ret = cpu_opv_check(cpuopv, cpuopcnt);
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
-	ret = cpu_opv_pin_pages(cpuopv, cpuopcnt,
-				&pinned_pages, &nr_pinned);
+	ret = cpu_opv_pin_pages(cpuopv, cpuopcnt, &pin_pages);
 	if (ret)
 		goto end;
 	ret = do_cpu_opv(cpuopv, cpuopcnt, cpu);
-	for (i = 0; i < nr_pinned; i++)
-		put_page(pinned_pages[i]);
+	for (i = 0; i < pin_pages.nr; i++)
+		put_page(pin_pages.pages[i]);
 end:
-	if (pinned_pages != pinned_pages_on_stack)
-		kfree(pinned_pages);
+	if (pin_pages.is_kmalloc)
+		kfree(pin_pages.pages);
 	return ret;
 }

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-07  2:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-06 20:56 [RFC PATCH for 4.15 00/14] Restartable sequences and CPU op vector v10 Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH v10 for 4.15 01/14] Restartable sequences system call Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-07  1:24   ` Boqun Feng
2017-11-07  1:24     ` Boqun Feng
2017-11-07  2:20     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-07  2:20       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 02/14] Restartable sequences: ARM 32 architecture support Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 03/14] Restartable sequences: wire up ARM 32 system call Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 04/14] Restartable sequences: x86 32/64 architecture support Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 05/14] Restartable sequences: wire up x86 32/64 system call Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 06/14] Restartable sequences: powerpc architecture support Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 07/14] Restartable sequences: Wire up powerpc system call Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH v2 for 4.15 08/14] Provide cpu_opv " Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-07  2:07   ` Boqun Feng
2017-11-07  2:07     ` Boqun Feng
2017-11-07  2:40     ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2017-11-07  2:40       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-07  3:03       ` Boqun Feng
2017-11-07  3:03         ` Boqun Feng
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 09/14] cpu_opv: Wire up x86 32/64 " Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 10/14] cpu_opv: Wire up powerpc " Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-07  0:37   ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07  0:37     ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07  0:47     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-07  0:47       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-07  1:21       ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07  1:21         ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 11/14] cpu_opv: Wire up ARM32 " Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH v2 for 4.15 12/14] cpu_opv: Implement selftests Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH v2 for 4.15 13/14] Restartable sequences: Provide self-tests Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.15 14/14] Restartable sequences selftests: arm: workaround gcc asm size guess Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-11-06 20:56   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-11-06  9:22 [PATCH] mm, sparse: do not swamp log with huge vmemmap allocation failures Michal Hocko
2017-11-06  9:22 ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-06 17:35 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-11-06 17:35   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-11-06 17:57   ` Joe Perches
2017-11-06 18:14 ` Khalid Aziz
2017-11-06 18:14   ` Khalid Aziz
2017-11-06 18:18   ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-06 18:18     ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-06 20:17     ` Khalid Aziz
2017-11-06 20:17       ` Khalid Aziz
2017-11-07  9:06 ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-07  9:06   ` Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=444885121.6172.1510022437259.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=ahh@google.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=bmaurer@fb.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=davejwatson@fb.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH v2 for 4.15 08/14] Provide cpu_opv system call' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.