Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/gup, drm/i915: refactor gup_fast, convert to pin_user_pages()

John Hubbard
2020-05-23T22:33:50Z

On 2020-05-23 02:41, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting John Hubbard (2020-05-22 06:19:27)
>> The purpose of posting this series is to launch a test in the
>> intel-gfx-ci tree. (The patches have already been merged into Andrew's
>> linux-mm tree.)
>>
>> This applies to today's linux.git (note the base-commit tag at the
>> bottom).
>>
>> Changes since V1:
>>
>> * Fixed a bug in the refactoring patch: added FOLL_FAST_ONLY to the
>> list of gup_flags *not* to WARN() on. This lead to a failure in the
>> first intel-gfx-ci test run [1].
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/159008745422.32320.5724805750977048669@build.alporthouse.com
>
> Ran this through our CI, warn and subsequent lockup were gone. That
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1;
t=1590273216; bh=oK85oUq4LCrgTs8kxvJryKE7a7GUQfAveFtGpNOU2dQ=;
h=X-PGP-Universal:Subject:To:CC:References:From:X-Nvconfidentiality:
Message-ID:Date:User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:
X-Originating-IP:X-ClientProxiedBy:Content-Type:Content-Language:
Content-Transfer-Encoding;
b=QoI4eJbYYVxcoARKgFJdRrxzB/GBPqy5yKIF46/pjR75LEiZvvAX947VBwywSMYhx
It8aQpMm6kMaF/rxiv0IPBf3tNGxNziWBAAhDXCyNqmvAS5s1HfdQh5ZoYbyDynKbJ
uF+u9JjBOYo5uTnn3IUaGPRgl/p9k6OhwRhbJ9nYreDwIF1/1pPeo97jwP2jW7AtDf
xDO5iJhGmwLYHPzRLilgiDdLbNhIGAP1XJ/4t/DByshidOUalduU7HxVQ9IOnysnCw
QcqSlpyPgx5LkJOvs63gO8n28hHJnoJ4FggNXC3D311lBWRuD7iekdP5WuvmrxUb8N
rZKwTpl0vJl9w==

Yea! Thanks again for these test runs. I really don't like posting
patches that I can't run-time test, but this CI system mitigates
that pretty well.

> lockup is worrying me now, but that doesn't seem to be an issue from
> this series.

I do think it's worth following up on. And it seems like it would be
very easy to repro: just hack in a forced failure at the call site of
pin_user_pages_fast_only(), and follow the breadcrumbs.

>
> The i915 changes were simple enough, I would have computed the pin flags
> just once (since the readonly bit is static, that would be interesting
> if that was allowed to change mid gup :)
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> -Chris
>

Thanks for the review! And if lifting that check up higher in the call
stack is desired, I'm all in favor of that being done...in a separate
patch. :)

I'm trying to keep a very light touch when converting these call sites.

thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA