From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/userfaultfd: prevent busy looping for tasks with signals pending
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:45:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aAqxAX2PimC2uZds@x1.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aAqUCK6V1I08cPpj@casper.infradead.org>
On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 08:42:00PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 02:26:37PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > Secondly, userfaultfd is indeed the only consumer of
> > FAULT_FLAG_INTERRUPTIBLE but not necessary always in the future. While
> > this patch resolves it for userfaultfd, it might get caught again later if
> > something else in the kernel starts to respects the _INTERRUPTIBLE flag
> > request. For example, __folio_lock_or_retry() ignores that flag so far,
> > but logically it should obey too (with a folio_wait_locked_interruptible)..
>
> No. Hell, no. We don't want non-fatal signals being able to interrupt
> that. There's a reason we introduced killable as a concept in the first
> place.
Not really proposing that as I don't have a use caes. Just curious, could
you explain a bit why having it interruptible is against the killable
concept if (IIUC) it is still killable?
Thanks,
--
Peter Xu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-24 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-23 23:37 [PATCH] mm/userfaultfd: prevent busy looping for tasks with signals pending Jens Axboe
2025-04-24 14:03 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-04-24 14:54 ` Jens Axboe
2025-04-24 15:11 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-04-24 15:22 ` Jens Axboe
2025-04-24 18:26 ` Peter Xu
2025-04-24 18:40 ` Jens Axboe
2025-04-24 19:13 ` Peter Xu
2025-04-24 19:20 ` Jens Axboe
2025-04-24 19:57 ` Peter Xu
2025-05-01 16:18 ` Peter Xu
2025-05-01 16:28 ` Peter Xu
2025-04-24 19:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-04-24 21:45 ` Peter Xu [this message]
2025-04-25 4:52 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-04-25 15:44 ` Peter Xu
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=aAqxAX2PimC2uZds@x1.local \
--to=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.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.