From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Xen Devel <Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the xen-tip tree
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 18:15:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <60058ac8-9d9a-f1f5-c6ad-948fbec5583c@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180816100511.2377dda2@canb.auug.org.au>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3008 bytes --]
On 08/15/2018 08:05 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 19:02:10 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
>>
>> drivers/xen/gntdev.c
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>> 1d3145675538 ("xen/gntdev: Make private routines/structures accessible")
>>
>> from the xen-tip tree and commit:
>>
>> aaefcabe9c25 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers")
>>
>> from the akpm-current tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>> complex conflicts.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell
>>
>> diff --cc drivers/xen/gntdev.c
>> index c866a62f766d,55b4f0e3f4d6..000000000000
>> --- a/drivers/xen/gntdev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/xen/gntdev.c
>> @@@ -479,7 -441,20 +479,20 @@@ static const struct vm_operations_struc
>>
>> /* ------------------------------------------------------------------ */
>>
>> -static bool in_range(struct grant_map *map,
>> ++static bool in_range(struct gntdev_grant_map *map,
>> + unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
>> + {
>> + if (!map->vma)
>> + return false;
>> + if (map->vma->vm_start >= end)
>> + return false;
>> + if (map->vma->vm_end <= start)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + return true;
>> + }
>> +
>> -static void unmap_if_in_range(struct grant_map *map,
>> +static void unmap_if_in_range(struct gntdev_grant_map *map,
>> unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
>> {
>> unsigned long mstart, mend;
>> @@@ -503,15 -472,26 +510,26 @@@
>> WARN_ON(err);
>> }
>>
>> - static void mn_invl_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
>> + static int mn_invl_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
>> struct mm_struct *mm,
>> - unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
>> + unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
>> + bool blockable)
>> {
>> struct gntdev_priv *priv = container_of(mn, struct gntdev_priv, mn);
>> - struct grant_map *map;
>> + struct gntdev_grant_map *map;
>> + int ret = 0;
>> +
>> + /* TODO do we really need a mutex here? */
>> + if (blockable)
>> + mutex_lock(&priv->lock);
>> + else if (!mutex_trylock(&priv->lock))
>> + return -EAGAIN;
>>
>> - mutex_lock(&priv->lock);
>> list_for_each_entry(map, &priv->maps, next) {
>> + if (in_range(map, start, end)) {
>> + ret = -EAGAIN;
>> + goto out_unlock;
>> + }
>> unmap_if_in_range(map, start, end);
I think I mentioned this earlier --- this doesn't look right. Not the
conflict resolution but the original patch.
Should I send a patch against -next? Or -mm?
-boris
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-17 22:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-30 9:02 linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the xen-tip tree Stephen Rothwell
2018-07-30 17:02 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2018-07-30 17:45 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2018-08-16 0:05 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-17 22:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky [this message]
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=60058ac8-9d9a-f1f5-c6ad-948fbec5583c@oracle.com \
--to=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).