[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180627145718.GB20171@ziepe.ca>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:57:18 -0600
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
John Hubbard <john.hubbard@...il.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: set PG_dma_pinned on get_user_pages*()
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:42:55PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 27-06-18 13:59:27, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 27-06-18 13:53:49, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Wed 27-06-18 13:32:21, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > Appart from that, do we really care about 32b here? Big DIO, IB users
> > > > seem to be 64b only AFAIU.
> > >
> > > IMO it is a bad habit to leave unpriviledged-user-triggerable oops in the
> > > kernel even for uncommon platforms...
> >
> > Absolutely agreed! I didn't mean to keep the blow up for 32b. I just
> > wanted to say that we can stay with a simple solution for 32b. I thought
> > the g-u-p-longterm has plugged the most obvious breakage already. But
> > maybe I just misunderstood.
>
> Most yes, but if you try hard enough, you can still trigger the oops e.g.
> with appropriately set up direct IO when racing with writeback / reclaim.
gup longterm is only different from normal gup if you have DAX and few
people do, which really means it doesn't help at all.. AFAIK??
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists