From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" <ljs@kernel.org>
To: Stanislav Kinsburskii <skinsburskii@gmail.com>
Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>,
airlied@gmail.com, akhilesh@ee.iitb.ac.in,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net, dakr@kernel.org,
jgg@ziepe.ca, kees@kernel.org, leon@kernel.org,
liam@infradead.org, lizhi.hou@amd.com, lyude@redhat.com,
maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com, mamin506@gmail.com,
mhocko@suse.com, mripard@kernel.org,
nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, ogabbay@kernel.org,
oleg@redhat.com, rppt@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org,
simona@ffwll.ch, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, surenb@google.com,
tzimmermann@suse.de, vbabka@kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/hmm: Clarify notifier retry state and scope HMM timeouts
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 17:02:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alet21wLwM6P_Km2@lucifer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alecaJ1FUso39D9k@skinsburskii>
To avoid confusion: obviously please don't merge this series Andrew.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 07:42:48AM -0700, Stanislav Kinsburskii wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 02:41:43PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> > On 7/15/26 00:21, Stanislav Kinsburskii wrote:
> > > This small fixup series applies on top of:
> > >
> > > [PATCH v8 0/8] mm/hmm: Add mmap lock-drop support for userfaultfd-backed mappings
> > >
> > > The first patch updates the HMM documentation example to make the
> > > mmu_interval_read_retry() state explicit: callers should use the notifier and
> > > notifier_seq stored in the same hmm_range that was passed to
> > > hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout().
> > >
> > > The remaining patches adjust nouveau, amdxdna, and drm_gpusvm users so the
> > > timeout passed to hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() is treated as a relative
> > > HMM retry budget. These callers no longer keep an absolute deadline around
> > > their outer driver retry loops or pass a computed remaining time into HMM.
> > >
> > > This keeps the timeout scoped to HMM's internal mmu-notifier retry handling. If
> > > HMM succeeds and the driver later observes an invalidation through
> > > mmu_interval_read_retry(), the driver retries the operation with a fresh HMM
> > > retry budget.
> > >
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > - Kept the nouveau outer absolute timeout around the
> > > mmu_interval_read_retry() loop. hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() only
> > > bounds HMM’s internal retries, while nouveau faults are handled from a GPU
> > > fault worker, so userspace fatal signals cannot break an endless stream of
> > > invalidations there.
> > > - Updated nouveau to use time_after_eq() before calling HMM, so the remaining
> > > timeout passed to hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() is always positive and
> > > never 0, which would mean retry indefinitely.
> > > - Updated the nouveau fixup commit message to explain the worker-thread
> > > timeout issue and the time_after_eq() boundary behavior.
> > > - Fixed the amdxdna fixup commit message. It now describes
> > > aie2_populate_range() correctly instead of carrying stale nouveau prose,
> > > and notes that command submission still keeps its broader timeout while HMM
> > > gets a fresh relative retry budget.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Stanislav Kinsburskii (4):
> > > fixup! mm/hmm: add hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for mmap lock-drop support
> > > fixup! drm/nouveau: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for SVM faults
> > > fixup! accel/amdxdna: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for range population
> > > fixup! drm/gpusvm: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for range faults
> >
> > Why a fixup series instead of properly resending the full thing?
> >
>
> The goal was to get a Sashiko review, and v8 has already been applied to
> both `mm-new` and `linux-next`.
Please don't do this, this is completely impossible to track for review :)
mm review is currently very difficult based on volumes, it'll become impossible
to manage if people sound fragments of series.
Please just resend the whole thing at this point.
>
> You can find more details here:
>
> https://sashiko.dev/#/message/alaWmUEeIBeSkmO0%40skinsburskii
>
> Thanks, Stanislav
>
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > David
Thanks, Lorenzo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" <ljs@kernel.org>
To: Stanislav Kinsburskii <skinsburskii@gmail.com>
Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>,
akhilesh@ee.iitb.ac.in, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
corbet@lwn.net, dakr@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, kees@kernel.org,
leon@kernel.org, liam@infradead.org, lizhi.hou@amd.com,
maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com, mamin506@gmail.com,
mhocko@suse.com, mripard@kernel.org,
nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, ogabbay@kernel.org,
oleg@redhat.com, rppt@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org,
simona@ffwll.ch, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, surenb@google.com,
vbabka@kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/hmm: Clarify notifier retry state and scope HMM timeouts
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 17:02:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alet21wLwM6P_Km2@lucifer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alecaJ1FUso39D9k@skinsburskii>
To avoid confusion: obviously please don't merge this series Andrew.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 07:42:48AM -0700, Stanislav Kinsburskii wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 02:41:43PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> > On 7/15/26 00:21, Stanislav Kinsburskii wrote:
> > > This small fixup series applies on top of:
> > >
> > > [PATCH v8 0/8] mm/hmm: Add mmap lock-drop support for userfaultfd-backed mappings
> > >
> > > The first patch updates the HMM documentation example to make the
> > > mmu_interval_read_retry() state explicit: callers should use the notifier and
> > > notifier_seq stored in the same hmm_range that was passed to
> > > hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout().
> > >
> > > The remaining patches adjust nouveau, amdxdna, and drm_gpusvm users so the
> > > timeout passed to hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() is treated as a relative
> > > HMM retry budget. These callers no longer keep an absolute deadline around
> > > their outer driver retry loops or pass a computed remaining time into HMM.
> > >
> > > This keeps the timeout scoped to HMM's internal mmu-notifier retry handling. If
> > > HMM succeeds and the driver later observes an invalidation through
> > > mmu_interval_read_retry(), the driver retries the operation with a fresh HMM
> > > retry budget.
> > >
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > - Kept the nouveau outer absolute timeout around the
> > > mmu_interval_read_retry() loop. hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() only
> > > bounds HMM’s internal retries, while nouveau faults are handled from a GPU
> > > fault worker, so userspace fatal signals cannot break an endless stream of
> > > invalidations there.
> > > - Updated nouveau to use time_after_eq() before calling HMM, so the remaining
> > > timeout passed to hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() is always positive and
> > > never 0, which would mean retry indefinitely.
> > > - Updated the nouveau fixup commit message to explain the worker-thread
> > > timeout issue and the time_after_eq() boundary behavior.
> > > - Fixed the amdxdna fixup commit message. It now describes
> > > aie2_populate_range() correctly instead of carrying stale nouveau prose,
> > > and notes that command submission still keeps its broader timeout while HMM
> > > gets a fresh relative retry budget.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Stanislav Kinsburskii (4):
> > > fixup! mm/hmm: add hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for mmap lock-drop support
> > > fixup! drm/nouveau: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for SVM faults
> > > fixup! accel/amdxdna: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for range population
> > > fixup! drm/gpusvm: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for range faults
> >
> > Why a fixup series instead of properly resending the full thing?
> >
>
> The goal was to get a Sashiko review, and v8 has already been applied to
> both `mm-new` and `linux-next`.
Please don't do this, this is completely impossible to track for review :)
mm review is currently very difficult based on volumes, it'll become impossible
to manage if people sound fragments of series.
Please just resend the whole thing at this point.
>
> You can find more details here:
>
> https://sashiko.dev/#/message/alaWmUEeIBeSkmO0%40skinsburskii
>
> Thanks, Stanislav
>
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > David
Thanks, Lorenzo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-15 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-14 22:21 [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/hmm: Clarify notifier retry state and scope HMM timeouts Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-14 22:21 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] fixup! mm/hmm: add hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for mmap lock-drop support Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-14 22:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 22:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] fixup! drm/nouveau: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for SVM faults Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-14 22:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] fixup! accel/amdxdna: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for range population Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-14 22:32 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 22:21 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] fixup! drm/gpusvm: use hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout() for range faults Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-14 22:59 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-15 12:41 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/hmm: Clarify notifier retry state and scope HMM timeouts David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-15 14:42 ` Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-15 14:42 ` Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-15 15:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-15 15:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-07-15 16:03 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-07-15 16:03 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-07-15 16:02 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) [this message]
2026-07-15 16:02 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-07-15 16:39 ` Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-15 16:39 ` Stanislav Kinsburskii
2026-07-15 17:14 ` Andrew Morton
2026-07-15 17:14 ` Andrew Morton
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=alet21wLwM6P_Km2@lucifer \
--to=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=akhilesh@ee.iitb.ac.in \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizhi.hou@amd.com \
--cc=lyude@redhat.com \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mamin506@gmail.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ogabbay@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=skinsburskii@gmail.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
--cc=vbabka@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 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.