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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 90186C7618F for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 17:59:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BACF21852 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 17:59:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1563991142; bh=St5GQXxw6i5OMdmiJQBNltNiWb6VR2PCKHSb/RJHrA8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=WcdhGHnueIAzWd6HvvK0K2ixuET2CQXapN57K98+JmSr1oOFypKu9yaRHpZG6qLMF xMH/B0oQcZzLsHx9tw6AtjcLlcJ15jkZMxPq9t8yc1tRqVrFytVCp/pXrZiiG/USLa J4h7QxiuybdRhcGqPz3vo2BlprWnmjIEW1WTBz6k= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726926AbfGXR7B (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 13:59:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33240 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726312AbfGXR7A (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 13:59:00 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF3CABD9; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 17:58:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:58:58 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Ralph Campbell , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, =?iso-8859-1?B?Suly9G1l?= Glisse , Ben Skeggs Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hmm: replace hmm_update with mmu_notifier_range Message-ID: <20190724175858.GC6410@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190723210506.25127-1-rcampbell@nvidia.com> <20190724070553.GA2523@lst.de> <20190724152858.GB28493@ziepe.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190724152858.GB28493@ziepe.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 24-07-19 12:28:58, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:05:53AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Looks good: > > > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig > > > > One comment on a related cleanup: > > > > > list_for_each_entry(mirror, &hmm->mirrors, list) { > > > int rc; > > > > > > - rc = mirror->ops->sync_cpu_device_pagetables(mirror, &update); > > > + rc = mirror->ops->sync_cpu_device_pagetables(mirror, nrange); > > > if (rc) { > > > - if (WARN_ON(update.blockable || rc != -EAGAIN)) > > > + if (WARN_ON(mmu_notifier_range_blockable(nrange) || > > > + rc != -EAGAIN)) > > > continue; > > > ret = -EAGAIN; > > > break; > > > > This magic handling of error seems odd. I think we should merge rc and > > ret into one variable and just break out if any error happens instead > > or claiming in the comments -EAGAIN is the only valid error and then > > ignoring all others here. > > The WARN_ON is enforcing the rules already commented near > mmuu_notifier_ops.invalidate_start - we could break or continue, it > doesn't much matter how to recover from a broken driver, but since we > did the WARN_ON this should sanitize the ret to EAGAIN or 0 > > Humm. Actually having looked this some more, I wonder if this is a > problem: > > I see in __oom_reap_task_mm(): > > if (mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start_nonblock(&range)) { > tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, range.start, range.end); > ret = false; > continue; > } > unmap_page_range(&tlb, vma, range.start, range.end, NULL); > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(&range); > > Which looks like it creates an unbalanced start/end pairing if any > start returns EAGAIN? > > This does not seem OK.. Many users require start/end to be paired to > keep track of their internal locking. Ie for instance hmm breaks > because the hmm->notifiers counter becomes unable to get to 0. > > Below is the best idea I've had so far.. > > Michal, what do you think? IIRC we have discussed this with Jerome back then when I've introduced this code and unless I misremember he said the current code was OK. Maybe new users have started relying on a new semantic in the meantime, back then, none of the notifier has even started any action in blocking mode on a EAGAIN bailout. Most of them simply did trylock early in the process and bailed out so there was nothing to do for the range_end callback. Has this changed? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs