[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191014084052.GB8666@xz-x1>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:40:52 +0800
From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Maya Gokhale <gokhale2@...l.gov>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Martin Cracauer <cracauer@...s.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
Marty McFadden <mcfadden8@...l.gov>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@...tuozzo.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/16] mm: Page fault enhancements
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 05:38:48PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> This is v5 of the series. As Matthew suggested, I split the previous
> patch "mm: Return faster for non-fatal signals in user mode faults"
> into a few smaller ones:
>
> 1. One patch to introduce fatal_signal_pending(), and use it in
> archs that can directly apply
>
> 2. A few more patches to let the rest archs to use the new helper.
> With that we can have an unified entry for signal detection
>
> 3. One last patch to change fatal_signal_pending() to detect
> userspace non-fatal signal
>
> Nothing should have changed in the rest patches. Because the fault
> retry patches will depend on the previous ones, I decided to simply
> repost all the patches.
>
> Here's the new patchset layout:
>
> Patch 1-2: cleanup, and potential bugfix of hugetlbfs on fault retry
>
> Patch 3-9: let page fault to respond to non-fatal signals faster
>
> Patch 10: remove the userfaultfd NOPAGE emulation
>
> Patch 11-14: allow page fault to retry more than once
>
> Patch 15-16: let gup code to use FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE too
>
> I would really appreciate any review comments for the series,
> especially for the first two patches which IMHO are even not related
> to this patchset and they should either cleanup or fix things.
Ping..
IMHO this series should fix some real issues, e.g., the whole series
targets to fix things like [1] or as patch 2 might fix potential
bugs. I'd appreciate if it can get some more review comments.
I didn't repost because the last patch only need a one-line change so
I assume it does not affect the most rest of reviews. I can repost if
anyone would like me to.
Thanks,
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20171102193644.GB22686@redhat.com/
--
Peter Xu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists