[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190816010036.GA9915@ziepe.ca>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:00:36 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/5] kernel.h: Add non_block_start/end()
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:49:31PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:27 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:16:43PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > So if someone can explain to me how that works with lockdep I can of
> > > course implement it. But afaics that doesn't exist (I tried to explain
> > > that somewhere else already), and I'm no really looking forward to
> > > hacking also on lockdep for this little series.
> >
> > Hmm, kind of looks like it is done by calling preempt_disable()
>
> Yup. That was v1, then came the suggestion that disabling preemption
> is maybe not the best thing (the oom reaper could still run for a long
> time comparatively, if it's cleaning out gigabytes of process memory
> or what not, hence this dedicated debug infrastructure).
Oh, I'm coming in late, sorry
Anyhow, I was thinking since we agreed this can trigger on some
CONFIG_DEBUG flag, something like
/* This is a sleepable region, but use preempt_disable to get debugging
* for calls that are not allowed to block for OOM [.. insert
* Michal's explanation.. ] */
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP) && !mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range))
preempt_disable();
ops->invalidate_range_start();
And I have also been idly mulling doing something like
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_NOTIFIERS) &&
rand &&
mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range)) {
range->flags = 0
if (!ops->invalidate_range_start(range))
continue
// Failed, try again as blockable
range->flags = MMU_NOTIFIER_RANGE_BLOCKABLE
}
ops->invalidate_range_start(range);
Which would give coverage for this corner case without forcing OOM.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists