From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C08D93FC4 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 13:21:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 46C7967357; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 15:21:32 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 15:21:32 +0200 From: "hch@lst.de" To: Dan Williams Cc: "ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com" , Jane Chu , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" , "nvdimm@lists.linux.dev" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "dm-devel@redhat.com" , "djwong@kernel.org" , "david@fromorbit.com" , "hch@lst.de" , "agk@redhat.com" , "snitzer@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v6 1/9] pagemap: Introduce ->memory_failure() Message-ID: <20210823132132.GA17677@lst.de> References: <20210730100158.3117319-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> <20210730100158.3117319-2-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> <1d286104-28f4-d442-efed-4344eb8fa5a1@oracle.com> <78c22960-3f6d-8e5d-890a-72915236bedc@oracle.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: nvdimm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:10:51AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > Sounds like a nice solution. I think I can add an is_notify_supported() interface in dax_holder_ops and check it when register dax_holder. > > Shouldn't the fs avoid registering a memory failure handler if it is > not prepared to take over? For example, shouldn't this case behave > identically to ext4 that will not even register a callback? Yes.