Message-Id: <20181121172055.91dc52fc0b985be85e640328@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:20:55 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/7] mm: Merge hmm into devm_memremap_pages, mark
 GPL-only

On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 15:12:49 -0800 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:

> Changes since v7 [1]:
> At Maintainer Summit, Greg brought up a topic I proposed around
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL usage. The motivation was considerations for when
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is warranted and the criteria for taking the
> exceptional step of reclassifying an existing export. Specifically, I
> wanted to make the case that although the line is fuzzy and hard to
> specify in abstract terms, it is nonetheless clear that
> devm_memremap_pages() and HMM (Heterogeneous Memory Management) have
> crossed it. The devm_memremap_pages() facility should have been
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL from the beginning, and HMM as a derivative of that
> functionality should have naturally picked up that designation as well.
> 
> Contrary to typical rules, the HMM infrastructure was merged upstream
> with zero in-tree consumers. There was a promise at the time that those
> users would be merged "soon", but it has been over a year with no drivers
> arriving. While the Nouveau driver is about to belatedly make good on
> that promise it is clear that HMM was targeted first and foremost at an
> out-of-tree consumer.
> 
> HMM is derived from devm_memremap_pages(), a facility Christoph and I
> spearheaded to support persistent memory. It combines a device lifetime
> model with a dynamically created 'struct page' / memmap array for any
> physical address range. It enables coordination and control of the many
> code paths in the kernel built to interact with memory via 'struct page'
> objects. With HMM the integration goes even deeper by allowing device
> drivers to hook and manipulate page fault and page free events.
> 
> One interpretation of when EXPORT_SYMBOL is suitable is when it is
> exporting stable and generic leaf functionality.  The
> devm_memremap_pages() facility continues to see expanding use cases,
> peer-to-peer DMA being the most recent, with no clear end date when it
> will stop attracting reworks and semantic changes. It is not suitable to
> export devm_memremap_pages() as a stable 3rd party driver API due to the
> fact that it is still changing and manipulates core behavior. Moreover,
> it is not in the best interest of the long term development of the core
> memory management subsystem to permit any external driver to effectively
> define its own system-wide memory management policies with no
> encouragement to engage with upstream.
> 
> I am also concerned that HMM was designed in a way to minimize further
> engagement with the core-MM. That, with these hooks in place,
> device-drivers are free to implement their own policies without much
> consideration for whether and how the core-MM could grow to meet that
> need. Going forward not only should HMM be EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, but the
> core-MM should be allowed the opportunity and stimulus to change and
> address these new use cases as first class functionality.
> 

The arguments are compelling.  I apologize for not thinking of and/or
not being made aware of them at the time.

I'll take [7/7] (with all the above added to the changelog) with a view
to a 4.21-rc1 merge.  That gives us a couple of months for further
discussion.  Public discussion, please.

It should be noted that [7/7] has a cc:stable.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists