From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DAD3C6FD19 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 08:56:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C83AA900003; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 04:56:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C341C900002; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 04:56:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id AFAE0900003; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 04:56:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FD83900002 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 04:56:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74FC3813F3 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 08:56:10 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80574154500.17.A113CC6 Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by imf24.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A9418001F for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 08:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=hqoiZDTT; spf=none (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 134.134.136.126) smtp.mailfrom=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1678956967; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=NGJZPs9g+ZU4A7M2cHbK4jUNGn2Ow836gLWqZFBZIts=; b=bzmcYfHodgtYV9C942UUJXcxlZ61nB+9yKfXpJq2ivJVKGRHVVb5d4e/usF5Rhs5TZqJKp jYZs0At7XFkSz3qW1dcyyYCwReC9EDWMjN7DtbEjsUXZtA1upBqDhgOVMkKlUOcJILOyEA dg8minu/xNT1znbFC54pzrmtI1Hx6KI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=hqoiZDTT; spf=none (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 134.134.136.126) smtp.mailfrom=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1678956967; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=VI6Sb+c+LwHM+jmLSJ9ltTQd6fe4y8mxAMcfadramjhLatWn9g7CnygNCcNMWkDKlNxuQe XTxEZobSXSEMSDyr78MIKEBvFw/PGkxja/PgjTAr+5yj9kyhwiOR+l8FfBrAhRVYpOukNp zun3YzWAde30Bt/3UPV3Go2bleL4eW4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1678956967; x=1710492967; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jfdxhk1RwEvFfimDfsyITAIQjollvnKSk7jJVrihtOM=; b=hqoiZDTTLrVk6ajxMnnLsmvESKn+KqIt38tnB1taHtgAq3kg0uYkqJx3 YOUPR7RemH8jN8svxsHvMym2Wx0Dybl+wJUyYQQKmTyfYd8OpQOJiCLMr nCbaxYlgHP+Gb21X/YLi6P2fesc8QzriGBfFQ3gZ2c3hMNe8YuGCgofqb pU/oZ9mQUnInxtd+woaRY0bmdjLJ0+AjF0lRyklF54/OGW1Fw4RAZe0yh EBYtq1SgXD/SY3SclpLLfV1aM3iKJXyOITe2L6NhvqSRJpOozxlW7cTDV FsFta115eV0XKU6Wt9sp1nwkMlCI1sMttse2Qf7exrXauOs1MmfVIAdha w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10650"; a="321769831" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.98,265,1673942400"; d="scan'208";a="321769831" Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Mar 2023 01:56:04 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10650"; a="925691736" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.98,265,1673942400"; d="scan'208";a="925691736" Received: from kflynn1-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.236.25]) ([10.213.236.25]) by fmsmga006-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Mar 2023 01:56:01 -0700 Message-ID: <4be7cbc0-dab5-eecc-1cea-8a6ffb831f10@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 08:55:59 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] drm/i915: Fix MAX_ORDER usage in i915_gem_object_get_pages_internal() Content-Language: en-US To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Vlastimil Babka , David Hildenbrand , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jani Nikula , Joonas Lahtinen , Rodrigo Vivi References: <20230315113133.11326-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20230315113133.11326-5-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <7fe9a4a0-9b30-38db-e739-1dc1f7a8f74e@linux.intel.com> <20230315152802.gr2olzji5zhu6vdo@box> <20230315153855.aeqyxncf3k6yqipl@box> From: Tvrtko Ursulin Organization: Intel Corporation UK Plc In-Reply-To: <20230315153855.aeqyxncf3k6yqipl@box> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Stat-Signature: 6hahqy1tm1enizewfirzj5huqn9ktk67 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 15A9418001F X-HE-Tag: 1678956966-690811 X-HE-Meta: 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 ieNTbaBR GmBthZpxTsNvo+5vyL22yy0jKRZuGh/BNFu7QmgxYuCKXR/2Za3LR+o8njaUIhiX9dsBrEDn329hBEjHlCVysZphJnbhHqQ99WwwbeTLSlyjdM0X/1qfUD1VVBrkEgW8vKfrGAJikAXdQC6pV3MKJhN0z3REmaTXUnmlvGb8napLFjdCh+nTR4TffCPRs0IuaDyJrQNTJLWRhB1e3b5x9f6Aj7oQAJKJlAqqvXn5/7X7LJsevk8YPhA+PsU3JChZqxJ1eJL/Z6zcas6dfMwmhwyzhFORkZZk9QgapcWwOf3k9g1QOponDcMkxVA== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 15/03/2023 15:38, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 03:35:23PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: >> >> On 15/03/2023 15:28, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 02:18:52PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: >>>> >>>> On 15/03/2023 11:31, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >>>>> MAX_ORDER is not inclusive: the maximum allocation order buddy allocator >>>>> can deliver is MAX_ORDER-1. >>>> >>>> This looks to be true on inspection: >>>> >>>> __alloc_pages(): >>>> .. >>>> if (WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP(order >= MAX_ORDER, gfp)) >>>> >>>> So a bit of a misleading name "max".. For the i915 patch: >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Tvrtko Ursulin >>>> >>>> I don't however see the whole series to understand the context, or how you >>>> want to handle the individual patches. Is it a tree wide cleanup of the same >>>> mistake? >>> >>> The whole patchset can be seen here: >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230315113133.11326-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com/ >>> >>> The idea is to fix all MAX_ORDER bugs first and then re-define MAX_ORDER >>> more sensibly. >> >> Sounds good. >> >> Would you like i915 to take this patch or you will be bringing the whole lot >> via some other route? Former is okay and latter should also be fine for i915 >> since I don't envisage any conflicts here. > > I think would be better to get it via mm tree. Ack for that. But as I saw that by the end of the series you also change this back as you redefine MAX_ORDER to be inclusive you could even simplify things and just not do anything for i915. I am pretty sure we never call this helper for > 4M allocations otherwise we would have seen this warn. Regards, Tvrtko