From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org>,
<bskeggs@redhat.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
<rcampbell@nvidia.com>, <jglisse@redhat.com>, <hch@infradead.org>,
<daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:20:52 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2083651.v4LkQjjfQp@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210302124152.GF4247@nvidia.com>
On Tuesday, 2 March 2021 11:41:52 PM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > However try_to_protect() scans the PTEs again under the PTL so checking
the
> > mapping of interest actually gets replaced during the rmap walk seems like
a
> > reasonable solution. Thanks for the comments.
>
> It does seem cleaner if you can manage it, the notifier will still be
> needd to program the HW though
Checking during the rmap walk wasn't hard but ultimately pointless. As you say
a range notifier and lock is required to program the hardware, which requires
checking the mappings with a mmu notifier sequence anyway.
- Alistair
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: rcampbell@nvidia.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, hch@infradead.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, bskeggs@redhat.com, daniel@ffwll.ch,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH v3 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:20:52 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2083651.v4LkQjjfQp@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210302124152.GF4247@nvidia.com>
On Tuesday, 2 March 2021 11:41:52 PM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > However try_to_protect() scans the PTEs again under the PTL so checking
the
> > mapping of interest actually gets replaced during the rmap walk seems like
a
> > reasonable solution. Thanks for the comments.
>
> It does seem cleaner if you can manage it, the notifier will still be
> needd to program the HW though
Checking during the rmap walk wasn't hard but ultimately pointless. As you say
a range notifier and lock is required to program the hardware, which requires
checking the mappings with a mmu notifier sequence anyway.
- Alistair
_______________________________________________
Nouveau mailing list
Nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: rcampbell@nvidia.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, hch@infradead.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, jglisse@redhat.com, bskeggs@redhat.com,
jhubbard@nvidia.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:20:52 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2083651.v4LkQjjfQp@nvdebian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210302124152.GF4247@nvidia.com>
On Tuesday, 2 March 2021 11:41:52 PM AEDT Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > However try_to_protect() scans the PTEs again under the PTL so checking
the
> > mapping of interest actually gets replaced during the rmap walk seems like
a
> > reasonable solution. Thanks for the comments.
>
> It does seem cleaner if you can manage it, the notifier will still be
> needd to program the HW though
Checking during the rmap walk wasn't hard but ultimately pointless. As you say
a range notifier and lock is required to program the hardware, which requires
checking the mappings with a mmu notifier sequence anyway.
- Alistair
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-04 5:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-26 7:18 [PATCH v3 0/8] Add support for SVM atomics in Nouveau Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 1/8] mm: Remove special swap entry functions Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 15:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-02-26 15:59 ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-02 8:52 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 8:52 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 8:52 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 12:02 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 12:02 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 12:02 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-01 17:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:46 ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 0:21 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 0:21 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 0:21 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 2/8] mm/swapops: Rework swap entry manipulation code Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 16:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-02-26 16:00 ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-01 17:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:47 ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 16:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-02-26 16:01 ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-01 16:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 16:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 16:10 ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-04 4:27 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-04 4:27 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-04 4:27 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 4/8] mm/rmap: Split migration into its own function Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 16:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-02-26 16:03 ` [Nouveau] " Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-02 22:08 ` Zi Yan
2021-03-02 22:08 ` Zi Yan
2021-03-02 22:08 ` [Nouveau] " Zi Yan
2021-03-04 23:54 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-04 23:54 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-04 23:54 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 5/8] mm: Device exclusive memory access Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-01 17:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:54 ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 22:55 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 22:55 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 22:55 ` [Nouveau] " Ralph Campbell
2021-03-02 0:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 0:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 0:05 ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 8:57 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 8:57 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 8:57 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 12:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 12:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-02 12:41 ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-04 5:20 ` Alistair Popple [this message]
2021-03-04 5:20 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-04 5:20 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 6/8] mm: Selftests for exclusive device memory Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-03-01 17:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 17:55 ` [Nouveau] " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-03-01 18:07 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 18:07 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 18:07 ` [Nouveau] " Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 23:14 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 23:14 ` Ralph Campbell
2021-03-01 23:14 ` [Nouveau] " Ralph Campbell
2021-03-02 9:12 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 9:12 ` Alistair Popple
2021-03-02 9:12 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 7/8] nouveau/svm: Refactor nouveau_range_fault Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [PATCH v3 8/8] nouveau/svm: Implement atomic SVM access Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` Alistair Popple
2021-02-26 7:18 ` [Nouveau] " Alistair Popple
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=2083651.v4LkQjjfQp@nvdebian \
--to=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bskeggs@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=rcampbell@nvidia.com \
/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.