linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/25] device-dax: use the dev

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPcyv4g+zk9pnLcj6Xvwh-svKM+w4hxfYGikcmuoBAFGCr-HAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:44:35 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org" <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/25] device-dax: use the dev_pagemap internal refcount

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:29 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:10:12AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:08 AM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:02 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 09:27:44AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 8:39 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 02:27:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > > > > The functionality is identical to the one currently open coded in
> > > > > > > device-dax.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> > > > > > >  drivers/dax/dax-private.h |  4 ----
> > > > > > >  drivers/dax/device.c      | 43 ---------------------------------------
> > > > > > >  2 files changed, 47 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > DanW: I think this series has reached enough review, did you want
> > > > > > to ack/test any further?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This needs to land in hmm.git soon to make the merge window.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was awaiting a decision about resolving the collision with Ira's
> > > > > patch before testing the final result again [1]. You can go ahead and
> > > > > add my reviewed-by for the series, but my tested-by should be on the
> > > > > final state of the series.
> > > >
> > > > The conflict looks OK to me, I think we can let Andrew and Linus
> > > > resolve it.
> > >
> > > Andrew's tree effectively always rebases since it's a quilt series.
> > > I'd recommend pulling Ira's patch out of -mm and applying it with the
> > > rest of hmm reworks. Any other git tree I'd agree with just doing the
> > > late conflict resolution, but I'm not clear on what's the best
> > > practice when conflicting with -mm.
>
> What happens depends on timing as things arrive to Linus. I promised
> to send hmm.git early, so I understand that Andrew will quilt rebase
> his tree to Linus's and fix the conflict in Ira's patch before he
> sends it.
>
> > Regardless the patch is buggy. If you want to do the conflict
> > resolution it should be because the DEVICE_PUBLIC removal effectively
> > does the same fix otherwise we're knowingly leaving a broken point in
> > the history.
>
> I'm not sure I understand your concern, is there something wrong with
> CH's series as it stands? hmm is a non-rebasing git tree, so as long
> as the series is correct *when I apply it* there is no broken history.
>
> I assumed the conflict resolution for Ira's patch was to simply take
> the deletion of the if block from CH's series - right?
>
> If we do need to take Ira's patch into hmm.git it will go after CH's
> series (and Ira will have to rebase/repost it), so I think there is
> nothing to do at this moment - unless you are saying there is a
> problem with the series in CH's git tree?

There is a problem with the series in CH's tree. It removes the
->page_free() callback from the release_pages() path because it goes
too far and removes the put_devmap_managed_page() call.