From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/5] kernel.h: Add non_block_start/end() Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:38:19 -0300 Message-ID: <20190816143819.GE5398@ziepe.ca> References: <20190815190525.GS9477@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190815191810.GR21596@ziepe.ca> <20190815193526.GT9477@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190815202721.GV21596@ziepe.ca> <20190816010036.GA9915@ziepe.ca> <20190816121243.GB5398@ziepe.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Michal Hocko , Feng Tang , Randy Dunlap , Kees Cook , Masahiro Yamada , Peter Zijlstra , Intel Graphics Development , Jann Horn , LKML , DRI Development , Linux MM , =?utf-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWU=?= Glisse , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , David Rientjes , Wei Wang , Daniel Vetter , Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 04:11:34PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Also, aside from this patch (which is prep for the next) and some > simple reordering conflicts they're all independent. So if there's no > way to paint this bikeshed here (technicolor perhaps?) then I'd like > to get at least the others considered. Sure, I think for conflict avoidance reasons I'm probably taking mmu_notifier stuff via hmm.git, so: - Andrew had a minor remark on #1, I am ambivalent and would take it as-is. Your decision if you want to respin. - #2/#3 is this issue, I would stand by the preempt_disable/etc path Our situation matches yours, debug tests run lockdep/etc. - #4 I like a lot, except the map should enclose range_end too, this can be done after the mm_has_notifiers inside the __mmu_notifier function Can you respin? I will propose preloading the map in another patch - #5 is already applied in -rc Jason