From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965289AbbJVPPY (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 11:15:24 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:36325 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756613AbbJVPPV (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 11:15:21 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 17:15:09 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Emelyanov , Sanidhya Kashyap , zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, Linus Torvalds , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andres Lagar-Cavilla , Dave Hansen , Paolo Bonzini , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , Andy Lutomirski , Hugh Dickins , Peter Feiner , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Johannes Weiner , "Huangpeng (Peter)" Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/23] userfaultfd: wake pending userfaults Message-ID: <20151022151509.GO3604@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1431624680-20153-1-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> <1431624680-20153-15-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> <20151022121056.GB7520@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20151022132015.GF19147@redhat.com> <20151022133824.GR17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20151022141831.GA1331@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151022141831.GA1331@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 04:18:31PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > The risk of memory corruption is still zero no matter what happens > here, in the extremely rare case the app will get a SIGBUS or a That might still upset people, SIGBUS isn't something an app can really recover from. > I'm not exactly sure why we allow VM_FAULT_RETRY only once currently > so I'm tempted to drop FAULT_FLAG_TRIED entirely. I think to ensure we make forward progress. > I've no real preference on how to tweak the page fault code to be able > to return VM_FAULT_RETRY indefinitely and I would aim for the smallest > change possible, so if you've suggestions now it's good time. Indefinitely is such a long time, we should try and finish computation before the computer dies etc. :-) Yes, yes.. I know, extremely unlikely etc. Still guarantees are good. In any case, I'm not really too bothered how you fix it, just figured I'd let you know.