From: Liew Rui Yan <aethernet65535@gmail.com>
To: sj@kernel.org
Cc: aethernet65535@gmail.com, damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/damon: reset thread status parameters upon kdamond termination
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2026 13:34:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260402053458.26524-1-aethernet65535@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260401154119.67874-1-sj@kernel.org>
Hi SeongJae,
On Wed, 1 Apr 2026 08:41:18 -0700 SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org> wrote:
> [...]
> What about checking if damon_call() and damon_commit_ctx() failures via therir
> return value? It seems damon_call() fails only when kdamond goes to the
> termination path. damon_commit_ctx() failure always causes the kdamond be
> terminated. So if I didn't miss something that could be a path forward. What
> do you think?
Thank you for the suggestion. I looked into the code and I think
focusing on damon_commit_ctx() failures makes sense.
Specifically, damon_call() is only used in the damon_{lru_sort, reclaim}
_enabled_store() path, which doesn't trigger unexpected termination. The
main risk comes from 'commit_inputs', which calls damon_{lru_sort,
reclaim}_apply_parameters() . When damon_commit_ctx() fails there, it
reliably indicates that kdamond is terminating.
My plan is to add the error check directly in apply_parameters(), right
after damon_commit_ctx():
err = damon_commit_ctx(ctx, param_ctx);
if (err) {
enabled = false;
kdamond_pid = -1;
}
This covers the reproducible case (addr_unit=3 + commit_inputs=Y).
For truly unexpected termination (e.g., memory allocation failure inside
kdamond), I'm considering a fallback mechanism in enabled_store():
- When the user writes 'N' to 'enabled', if damon_stop() fails but
kdamond is actually terminated, we reset enabled and kdamond_pid.
- When the user writes 'Y' to 'enabled', if enabled is already 'Y' but
kdamond is terminated, we treat this as a restart request.
This way, even if kdamond terminates unexpectedly, the next user
interaction will recover the state automatically.
Does this approach sound reasonable?
Best regards,
Rui Yan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-02 5:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-30 16:43 [RFC PATCH] mm/damon: reset thread status parameters upon kdamond termination Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-30 18:53 ` (sashiko review) " Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-30 19:51 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-30 22:42 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-31 5:02 ` SeongJae Park
2026-03-31 6:58 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-31 16:09 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-04-01 0:44 ` SeongJae Park
2026-04-01 8:24 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-04-01 15:41 ` SeongJae Park
2026-04-02 5:34 ` Liew Rui Yan [this message]
2026-04-02 13:54 ` SeongJae Park
2026-04-03 4:34 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-04-03 14:06 ` SeongJae Park
2026-04-01 0:29 ` SeongJae Park
2026-04-01 8:23 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-04-02 0:40 ` SeongJae Park
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=20260402053458.26524-1-aethernet65535@gmail.com \
--to=aethernet65535@gmail.com \
--cc=damon@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=sj@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox