[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170124225625.GD19920@node.shutemov.name>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:56:25 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] uprobes: split THPs before trying replace them
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 02:35:59PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:22:17 +0300 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 01:28:49PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:28:13 +0300 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > For THPs page_check_address() always fails. It's better to split them
> > > > first before trying to replace.
> > >
> > > So what does this mean. uprobes simply fails to work when trying to
> > > place a probe into a THP memory region?
> >
> > Looks like we can end up with endless retry loop in uprobe_write_opcode().
> >
> > > How come nobody noticed (and reported) this when using the feature?
> >
> > I guess it's not often used for anon memory.
>
> OK, can we please include discussion of these things in the changelog?
Okay, I'll try to come up with a test case too.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists