From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrey Vagin <avagin@openvz.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86,mm: make pagefault killable
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:13:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110324171319.GA20182@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110322200945.B06D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On 03/22, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> This patch makes pagefault interruptible by SIGKILL.
Not a comment, but the question...
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> @@ -1035,6 +1035,7 @@ do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code)
> if (user_mode_vm(regs)) {
> local_irq_enable();
> error_code |= PF_USER;
> + flags |= FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE;
OK, this is clear.
I am wondering, can't we set FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE unconditionally
but check PF_USER when we get VM_FAULT_RETRY? I mean,
if ((fault & VM_FAULT_RETRY) && fatal_signal_pending(current)) {
if (!(error_code & PF_USER))
no_context(...);
return;
}
Probably not... but I can't find any example of in-kernel fault which
can be broken by -EFAULT if current was killed.
mm_release()->put_user(clear_child_tid) should be fine...
Just curious, I feel I missed something obvious.
Oleg.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrey Vagin <avagin@openvz.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86,mm: make pagefault killable
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:13:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110324171319.GA20182@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110322200945.B06D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On 03/22, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> This patch makes pagefault interruptible by SIGKILL.
Not a comment, but the question...
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> @@ -1035,6 +1035,7 @@ do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code)
> if (user_mode_vm(regs)) {
> local_irq_enable();
> error_code |= PF_USER;
> + flags |= FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE;
OK, this is clear.
I am wondering, can't we set FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE unconditionally
but check PF_USER when we get VM_FAULT_RETRY? I mean,
if ((fault & VM_FAULT_RETRY) && fatal_signal_pending(current)) {
if (!(error_code & PF_USER))
no_context(...);
return;
}
Probably not... but I can't find any example of in-kernel fault which
can be broken by -EFAULT if current was killed.
mm_release()->put_user(clear_child_tid) should be fine...
Just curious, I feel I missed something obvious.
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-24 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 134+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-15 1:49 Linux 2.6.38 Linus Torvalds
2011-03-15 3:13 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-15 4:06 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-03-15 4:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-15 4:29 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-15 4:33 ` Andrew Morton
2011-03-15 4:50 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-15 6:21 ` Andrew Morton
2011-03-16 9:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 11:04 ` [patch 0/5] oom: a few anti fork bomb patches KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 11:05 ` [PATCH 1/5] vmscan: remove all_unreclaimable check from direct reclaim path completely KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 11:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 14:49 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-22 14:49 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 5:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 5:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 6:59 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 6:59 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 7:13 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 7:13 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 8:24 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 8:24 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 8:44 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 8:44 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 9:02 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 9:02 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 2:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 2:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 2:21 ` Andrew Morton
2011-03-24 2:21 ` Andrew Morton
2011-03-24 2:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 2:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 3:04 ` Andrew Morton
2011-03-24 3:04 ` Andrew Morton
2011-03-24 5:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 5:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 4:19 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 4:19 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 5:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 5:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 5:53 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 5:53 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 6:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 6:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 6:32 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 6:32 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:03 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 7:03 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 7:25 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:25 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:28 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 7:28 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 7:34 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:34 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:41 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:41 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:43 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 7:43 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 7:43 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 7:43 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 7:41 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-23 7:41 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-23 7:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 7:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 11:06 ` [PATCH 2/5] Revert "oom: give the dying task a higher priority" KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 7:42 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-23 13:40 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2011-03-23 13:40 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2011-03-24 0:06 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 0:06 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-24 15:27 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 15:27 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 9:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-28 9:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-28 12:28 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 12:28 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 9:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-28 9:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-28 12:21 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 12:21 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 12:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-28 12:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-28 12:40 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 12:40 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 13:10 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2011-03-28 13:10 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2011-03-28 13:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-28 13:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-28 13:56 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2011-03-28 13:56 ` Luis Claudio R. Goncalves
2011-03-29 2:46 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-29 2:46 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-28 13:48 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-28 13:48 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-22 11:08 ` [PATCH 3/5] oom: create oom autogroup KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 11:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 23:21 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-22 23:21 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-23 1:27 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 1:27 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 2:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-03-23 2:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-03-22 11:08 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm: introduce wait_on_page_locked_killable KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 11:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 7:44 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-23 7:44 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-24 15:04 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 15:04 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-22 11:09 ` [PATCH 5/5] x86,mm: make pagefault killable KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-22 11:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 7:49 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-23 7:49 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-23 8:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 8:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-23 14:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-23 14:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-24 15:10 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 15:10 ` Minchan Kim
2011-03-24 17:13 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2011-03-24 17:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-03-24 17:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-24 17:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-28 7:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-28 7:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-03-15 21:08 ` Linux 2.6.38 Oleg Nesterov
2011-03-15 23:32 ` unnecessary oom killer panics in 2.6.38 (was Re: Linux 2.6.38) David Rientjes
2011-03-15 3:14 ` Linux 2.6.38 Steven Rostedt
2011-03-15 4:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-16 17:30 ` i915/kms regression after 2.6.38-rc8 (was: Re: Linux 2.6.38) Melchior FRANZ
2011-03-16 19:22 ` i915/kms regression after 2.6.38-rc8 Jiri Slaby
2011-03-16 19:22 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-03-16 19:43 ` i915/kms regression after 2.6.38-rc8 (was: Re: Linux 2.6.38) Chris Wilson
2011-03-16 21:09 ` i915/kms regression after 2.6.38-rc8 Melchior FRANZ
2011-03-20 18:30 ` i915/kms regression after 2.6.38-rc8 (was: Re: Linux 2.6.38) Maciej Rutecki
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=20110324171319.GA20182@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avagin@openvz.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 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.