[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6F9B0A6A-B7F1-4E25-AB15-8F3782D2EF83@fb.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2023 06:03:37 +0000
From: Song Liu <songliubraving@...a.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
CC: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
David Stevens <stevensd@...omium.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Jiaqi Yan <jiaqiyan@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/khugepaged: maintain page cache uptodate flag
> On Mar 23, 2023, at 8:30 PM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
[...]
>
> The Uptodate flag check needs to be done by the caller; the
> find_get_page() family return !uptodate pages.
>
> But find_get_page() does not advertise itself as NMI-safe. And I
> think it's wrong to try to make it NMI-safe. Most of the kernel is
> not NMI-safe. I think it's incumbent on the BPF people to get the
> information they need ahead of taking the NMI. NMI handlers are not
> supposed to be doing a huge amount of work! I don't really understand
> why it needs to do work in NMI context; surely it can note the location of
> the fault and queue work to be done later (eg on irq-enable, task-switch
> or return-to-user)
The use case here is a profiler (similar to perf-record). Parsing the
build id in side the NMI makes the profiler a lot simpler. Otherwise,
we will need some post processing for each sample.
OTOH, it is totally fine if build_id_parse() fails some time, say < 5%.
The profiler output is still useful in such cases.
I guess the next step is to replace find_get_page() with a NMI-safe
version?
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists