From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
"Ralph Campbell" <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>,
"Ben Skeggs" <bskeggs@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hmm: replace hmm_update with mmu_notifier_range
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 21:48:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190724194855.GA15029@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190724192155.GG28493@ziepe.ca>
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:21:55PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> If we change the register to keep the hlist sorted by address then we
> can do a targetted 'undo' of past starts terminated by address
> less-than comparison of the first failing struct mmu_notifier.
>
> It relies on the fact that rcu is only used to remove items, the list
> adds are all protected by mm locks, and the number of mmu notifiers is
> very small.
>
> This seems workable and does not need more driver review/update...
>
> However, hmm's implementation still needs more fixing.
Can we take one step back, please? The only reason why drivers
implement both ->invalidate_range_start and ->invalidate_range_end and
expect them to be called paired is to keep some form of counter of
active invalidation "sections". So instead of doctoring around
undo schemes the only sane answer is to take such a counter into the
core VM code instead of having each driver struggle with it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-24 19:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-23 21:05 [PATCH] mm/hmm: replace hmm_update with mmu_notifier_range Ralph Campbell
2019-07-24 7:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-24 15:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-24 15:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-24 18:00 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-24 18:01 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-24 17:58 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-24 18:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-24 18:56 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-24 18:59 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-24 19:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-24 19:48 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-07-24 20:18 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-25 1:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-25 17:53 ` Ralph Campbell
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=20190724194855.GA15029@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=bskeggs@redhat.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).