On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 10:05 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 11:44:54AM -0400, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> > >> That's a good catch. Existing drivers shouldn't need a page_free
> > >> callback if they didn't have one before. That means we need to add a
> > >> NULL-pointer
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 11:00 AM Sierra Guiza, Alejandro (Alex)
wrote:
>
>
> On 8/18/2021 2:28 PM, Ralph Campbell wrote:
> > On 8/17/21 5:35 PM, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> >> Am 2021-08-17 um 8:01 p.m. schrieb Ralph Campbell:
> >>> On 8/12/21 11:31 PM, Alex Sierra wrote:
> From: Ralph Campbell
Note that you do not want GUP to succeed on device page, i do not see
where that is handled in the new code.
On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 1:40 PM John Hubbard wrote:
>
> On 8/15/21 8:37 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
> >> index
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 09:35:20AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 11:57:28PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 9 February 2021 9:27:05 PM AEDT Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Recent changes to pin_user_pages() prevent the creation of pinned pages
> > > >
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 02:37:36PM +0100, Christian König wrote:
> Am 14.01.21 um 12:52 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > [SNIP]
> > > > I had a new idea, i wanted to think more about it but have not yet,
> > > > anyway here it is. Adding a new callback to dma fence which ask the
> > > > question can it
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:31:11PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 5:56 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 03:40:07PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 11:25:41AM -0500, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> > > > Am 2
On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 03:40:07PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 11:25:41AM -0500, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> > Am 2021-01-07 um 4:23 a.m. schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > > On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 10:00:52PM -0500, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> > >> This is the first version of our HMM
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 10:00:52PM -0500, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> This is the first version of our HMM based shared virtual memory manager
> for KFD. There are still a number of known issues that we're working through
> (see below). This will likely lead to some pretty significant changes in
> MMU
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 07:19:07PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 7:09 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > Adding few folks on cc just to raise awareness and so that i
> > could get corrected if i said anything wrong.
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 17,
Adding few folks on cc just to raise awareness and so that i
could get corrected if i said anything wrong.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 04:45:55PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 4:36 PM Christian König
> wrote:
> > Am 17.12.20 um 16:26 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > > On Thu, Dec
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 08:46:17AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 04:31:47PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > Not doable as page refcount can change for things unrelated to GUP, with
> > John changes we can identify GUP and we could potentialy copy GUPed p
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:43:20PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:10 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 03:18:49PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:09:35PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 04:55:38PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 03:48:49PM -0400, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> > Am 2020-06-19 um 2:18 p.m. schrieb Jason Gunthorpe:
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:09:35PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > >> On F
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 03:18:49PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:09:35PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:23:08PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 06:19:41PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 03:30:32PM -0400, Felix Kuehling wrote:
>
> Am 2020-06-19 um 3:11 p.m. schrieb Alex Deucher:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:09 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:23:08PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >>> On Fri,
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 07:35:35PM -0400, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> Am 2020-06-11 um 10:15 a.m. schrieb Jason Gunthorpe:
> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:34:30AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >>> I still have my doubts about allowing fence waiting from within shrinkers.
> >>> IMO ideally they should
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:23:08PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 06:19:41PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> > The madness is only that device B's mmu notifier might need to wait
> > for fence_B so that the dma operation finishes. Which in turn has to
> > wait for device
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 02:42:12AM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 10:23:31AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 10:03 AM Linus Torvalds
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I'll try to figure the code out, but my initial reaction was "yeah,
> > > not in my VM".
>
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 11:19:43AM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 06:32:52PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:33:27AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
&
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 01:24:18PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 01:12:47PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
>
> > > > > Using a temporary range is the pattern from nouveau, is it really
> > > > > necessary in this driver?
> > > >
> > > > Yah, not required. In my
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
[...]
> > +static int
> > +i915_range_fault(struct i915_svm *svm, struct hmm_range *range)
> > +{
> > + long ret;
> > +
> > + range->default_flags =
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 02:00:06PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 11:23 AM Dan Williams
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 8:27 PM John Hubbard wrote:
> > >
> > > An upcoming patch changes and complicates the refcounting and
> > > especially the "put page" aspects of
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 08:26:51PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> An upcoming patch changes and complicates the refcounting and
> especially the "put page" aspects of it. In order to keep
> everything clean, refactor the devmap page release routines:
>
> * Rename put_devmap_managed_page() to
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 10:17:10AM -0800, Yiwei Zhang wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> What do you think about:
> > For the sysfs approach, I'm assuming the upstream vendors still need
> > to provide a pair of UMD and KMD, and this ioctl to label the BO is
> > kept as driver private ioctl. Then will each
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 10:33:02PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 08:06:08PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > >
> > > enum mmu_range_notifier_event {
> > > MMU_NOTIFY_RELEASE,
> > > };
> > >
> > > ...assuming that we stay with "mmu_range_notifier" as a core name for
On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:32:25AM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 04:04:08PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 08:11:06PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 09:08:07PM -0500, J
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 08:11:06PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 09:08:07PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Extra credit: IMHO, this clearly deserves to all be in a new
> > > mmu_range_notifier.h
> > > header file,
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:23:21PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 10/28/19 1:10 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
[...]
> > /**
> > * enum mmu_notifier_event - reason for the mmu notifier callback
> > @@ -32,6 +34,9 @@ struct mmu_notifier_range;
> > * access flags). User should soft dirty the
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 02:49:18PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 11/4/19 10:52 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:18:07PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> >> Add tracking of pages that were pinned via FOLL_PIN.
> >>
> >> As mentioned in the
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 12:33:09PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 3 Nov 2019, John Hubbard wrote:
>
> > Introduce pin_user_pages*() variations of get_user_pages*() calls,
> > and also pin_longterm_pages*() variations.
> >
> > These variants all set FOLL_PIN, which is also
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 12:09:05PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> Jason, a question for you at the bottom.
>
> On 11/4/19 11:52 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> ...
> >> CASE 3: ODP
> >> ---
> >> RDMA hardware with page faulting support. Here, a well-writ
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 11:30:32AM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 11/4/19 11:18 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 11:04:38AM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> >> On 11/4/19 9:33 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>> Fe
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 11:04:38AM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 11/4/19 9:33 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> ...
> >
> > Few nitpick belows, nonetheless:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Jérôme Glisse
> > [...]
> >> +
> >> +CASE 3: ODP
> &g
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:18:07PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> Add tracking of pages that were pinned via FOLL_PIN.
>
> As mentioned in the FOLL_PIN documentation, callers who effectively set
> FOLL_PIN are required to ultimately free such pages via put_user_page().
> The effect is similar to
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:18:04PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> Convert drm/via to use the new pin_user_pages_fast() call, which sets
> FOLL_PIN. Setting FOLL_PIN is now required for code that requires
> tracking of pinned pages, and therefore for any code that calls
> put_user_page().
>
>
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:18:03PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> Convert process_vm_access to use the new pin_user_pages_remote()
> call, which sets FOLL_PIN. Setting FOLL_PIN is now required for
> code that requires tracking of pinned pages.
>
> Also, release the pages via put_user_page*().
>
>
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:18:00PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> Introduce pin_user_pages*() variations of get_user_pages*() calls,
> and also pin_longterm_pages*() variations.
>
> These variants all set FOLL_PIN, which is also introduced, and
> thoroughly documented.
>
> The pin_longterm*()
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:17:58PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> 1. Avoid naming conflicts: rename local static function from
> "pin_user_pages()" to "pin_goldfish_pages()".
>
> An upcoming patch will introduce a global pin_user_pages()
> function.
>
> Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny
> Signed-off-by:
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:17:57PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> There are four locations in gup.c that have a fair amount of code
> duplication. This means that changing one requires making the same
> changes in four places, not to mention reading the same code four
> times, and wondering if there
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 01:17:56PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> A subsequent patch requires access to gup flags, so
> pass the flags argument through to the __gup_device_*
> functions.
>
> Also placate checkpatch.pl by shortening a nearby line.
>
> Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny
> Cc: Kirill A.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 11:35:32AM -0700, Yiwei Zhang wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This is the plain text version of the previous email in case that was
> considered as spam.
>
> --- Background ---
> On the downstream Android, vendors used to report GPU private memory
> allocations with debugfs nodes
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 07:06:00PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 02:40:41PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:27PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > From: Jason Gunthorpe
> > >
> > > 8 of the mmu_notifie
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:32:16AM +0200, Christian König wrote:
> Am 23.10.19 um 11:08 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 03:01:13PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 09:57:35AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > >
> > > > > The unusual bit in all of this
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 07:24:53PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 03:11:57PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > Since that reader is not locked we need release semantics here to
> > > ensure the unlocked reader sees a fully initinalized mmu_notifier_mm
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 06:57:42PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 02:38:24PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:42PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > From: Jason Gunthorpe
> > >
> > > The only two us
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 06:54:25PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 02:30:56PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > > +/**
> > > + * mmu_range_read_retry - End a read side critical section against a VA
> > > range
> > > + * mrn: The
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:27PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe
>
> 8 of the mmu_notifier using drivers (i915_gem, radeon_mn, umem_odp, hfi1,
> scif_dma, vhost, gntdev, hmm) drivers are using a common pattern where
> they only use invalidate_range_start/end and
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:42PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe
>
> The only two users of this are now converted to use mmu_range_notifier,
> delete all the code and update hmm.rst.
I guess i should point out that the reasons for hmm_mirror and hmm
was for:
1) Maybe
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:30PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe
>
> hmm_mirror's handling of ranges does not use a sequence count which
> results in this bug:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
>
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:28PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe
>
> Now that we have KERNEL_HEADER_TEST all headers are generally compile
> tested, so relying on makefile tricks to avoid compiling code that depends
> on CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER is more annoying.
>
> Instead
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:31PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe
>
> Only the function calls are stubbed out with static inlines that always
> fail. This is the standard way to write a header for an optional component
> and makes it easier for drivers that only optionally
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 03:12:29PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe
>
> Of the 13 users of mmu_notifiers, 8 of them use only
> invalidate_range_start/end() and immediately intersect the
> mmu_notifier_range with some kind of internal list of VAs. 4 use an
> interval tree
On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 11:31:45AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 02:26:25PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 16-08-19 09:19:06, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:10:29AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Thu 15-08-19 17:13:23, Jason
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 08:52:56PM +, Yang, Philip wrote:
> hmm_range_fault may return NULL pages because some of pfns are equal to
> HMM_PFN_NONE. This happens randomly under memory pressure. The reason is
> for swapped out page pte path, hmm_vma_handle_pte doesn't update fault
> variable
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 08:41:33PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 04:33:06PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > So nor HMM nor driver should dereference the struct page (i do not
> > think any iommu driver would either),
>
> Er, they do technical
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 01:12:22PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:44 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:36:58PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > >
&
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:36:58PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 07:48:28AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 6:28 AM Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > >
&
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 03:01:59PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 01:39:22PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 02:35:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 06:25:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > &
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 07:48:28AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 6:28 AM Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:38:54AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 06:36:33PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > Section alignment
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 07:42:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 15-08-19 13:56:31, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 06:00:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > > > AFAIK 'GFP_NOWAIT' is characterized by the lack of __GFP_FS and
> > > > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM..
> > > >
> >
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 05:58:52PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:02:14AM -0700, Ralph Campbell wrote:
> > When memory is migrated to the GPU it is likely to be accessed by GPU
> > code soon afterwards. Instead of waiting for a GPU fault, map the
>
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 02:35:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 06:25:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> > I'm not really well versed in the details of our userptr, but both
> > amdgpu and i915 wait for the gpu to complete from
> > invalidate_range_start. Jerome has
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 07:21:47PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 7:16 PM Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:32:38PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:10:28PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 01:56:31PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 06:00:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > > AFAIK 'GFP_NOWAIT' is characterized by the lack of __GFP_FS and
> > > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM..
> > >
> > > This matches the existing test in __need_fs_reclaim() -
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:10:28PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 04:43:38PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> > You have to wait for the gpu to finnish current processing in
> > invalidate_range_start. Otherwise there's no point to any of this
> > really. So the
On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 08:02:14AM -0700, Ralph Campbell wrote:
> When memory is migrated to the GPU it is likely to be accessed by GPU
> code soon afterwards. Instead of waiting for a GPU fault, map the
> migrated memory into the GPU page tables with the same access permissions
> as the source
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 07:46:33AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 07:30:44PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 05:28:43PM +0300, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > The MIGRATE_PFN_WRITE is only used locally in migrate_vma_collect_pmd,
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 04:42:01PM -0700, Ralph Campbell wrote:
>
> On 7/29/19 7:28 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The MIGRATE_PFN_WRITE is only used locally in migrate_vma_collect_pmd,
> > where it can be replaced with a simple boolean local variable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 05:28:35PM +0300, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> There isn't any good reason to pass callbacks to migrate_vma. Instead
> we can just export the three steps done by this function to drivers and
> let them sequence the operation without callbacks. This removes a lot
> of
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 05:28:43PM +0300, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The MIGRATE_PFN_WRITE is only used locally in migrate_vma_collect_pmd,
> where it can be replaced with a simple boolean local variable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
NAK that flag is useful, for instance a anonymous vma
On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 12:14:50AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:27 AM Souptick Joarder
> wrote:
> >
> > Convert to use hmm_range_fault().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder
>
> Would you like to take it through your new hmm tree or do I
> need
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 06:00:36PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 5:41 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:39:45PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > This is a similar idea to the fs_reclaim fake lockdep lock. It's
>
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:39:42PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Just a bit of paranoia, since if we start pushing this deep into
> callchains it's hard to spot all places where an mmu notifier
> implementation might fail when it's not allowed to.
>
> Inspired by some confusion we had discussing
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:39:45PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> This is a similar idea to the fs_reclaim fake lockdep lock. It's
> fairly easy to provoke a specific notifier to be run on a specific
> range: Just prep it, and then munmap() it.
>
> A bit harder, but still doable, is to provoke the
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:39:44PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> We need to make sure implementations don't cheat and don't have a
> possible schedule/blocking point deeply burried where review can't
> catch it.
>
> I'm not sure whether this is the best way to make sure all the
> might_sleep()
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 02:27:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2019 19:53:23 + "Kuehling, Felix"
> wrote:
>
> > From: Philip Yang
> >
> > While the page is migrating by NUMA balancing, HMM failed to detect this
> > condition and still return the old page. Application will
t expecting it too ?
Cheers,
Jérôme
>
> Thanks,
> Felix
>
> On 2019-05-10 4:14 p.m., Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > [CAUTION: External Email]
> >
> > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 07:53:24PM +, Kuehling, Felix wrote:
> >> Don't set this flag by default in
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 07:53:23PM +, Kuehling, Felix wrote:
> From: Philip Yang
>
> While the page is migrating by NUMA balancing, HMM failed to detect this
> condition and still return the old page. Application will use the new
> page migrated, but driver pass the old page physical address
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 07:53:24PM +, Kuehling, Felix wrote:
> Don't set this flag by default in hmm_vma_do_fault. It is set
> conditionally just a few lines below. Setting it unconditionally
> can lead to handle_mm_fault doing a non-blocking fault, returning
> -EBUSY and unlocking mmap_sem
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 10:26:32PM +0800, Yue Haibing wrote:
> From: YueHaibing
>
> During randconfig builds, I occasionally run into an invalid configuration
>
> WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for DEVICE_PRIVATE
> Depends on [n]: ARCH_HAS_HMM_DEVICE [=n] && ZONE_DEVICE [=n]
>
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 09:15:52AM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-04-16 at 10:46 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 08:34:02AM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > > Hi, Jérôme
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2019-04-12 at 17:07 -0400,
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 08:34:02AM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> Hi, Jérôme
>
> On Fri, 2019-04-12 at 17:07 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 04:04:18PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > > This is basically apply_to_page_range with added functio
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 04:04:18PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> This is basically apply_to_page_range with added functionality:
> Allocating missing parts of the page table becomes optional, which
> means that the function can be guaranteed not to error if allocation
> is disabled. Also
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 03:21:08PM +, Weiny, Ira wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 04:41:57PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 12:47:46PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > > From: Jérôme Glisse
> > > >
> > > > CPU page
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 04:41:57PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 12:47:46PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > From: Jérôme Glisse
> >
> > CPU page table update can happens for many reasons, not only as a result
> > of a syscall (munmap(), mp
On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 03:08:55PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:47:39 -0400 jgli...@redhat.com wrote:
>
> > From: Jérôme Glisse
> >
> > (Andrew this apply on top of my HMM patchset as otherwise you will have
> > conflict with changes to mm/hmm.c)
> >
> > Changes since
Andrew anything blocking this for 5.2 ? Should i ask people (ie the end
user of this) to re-ack v6 (it is the same as previous version just rebase
and dropped kvm bits).
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 12:47:39PM -0400, jgli...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Jérôme Glisse
>
> (Andrew this apply on top of
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 06:09:18PM -0700, Ronan KERYELL wrote:
> I am adding linux-f...@vger.kernel.org, since this is why I missed this
> thread in the first place...
> > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:56:17 +1000, Dave Airlie
> > said:
> Dave> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 10:14, Sonal Santan
>
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 08:29:31PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 10:12 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:22:41PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > > Add two utilities to a) write-protect and b) clean all ptes
> > >
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 07:51:16PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> Hi, Jérôme,
>
> Thanks for commenting. I have a couple of questions / clarifications
> below.
>
> On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 09:46 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:22:22PM +
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 07:59:35PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 09:52 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:22:35PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > > This is basically apply_to_page_range with added functionality:
> > &g
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:22:41PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> Add two utilities to a) write-protect and b) clean all ptes pointing into
> a range of an address space
> The utilities are intended to aid in tracking dirty pages (either
> driver-allocated system memory or pci device memory).
>
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:22:35PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> This is basically apply_to_page_range with added functionality:
> Allocating missing parts of the page table becomes optional, which
> means that the function can be guaranteed not to error if allocation
> is disabled. Also
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:22:22PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> Resending since last series was sent through a mis-configured SMTP server.
>
> Hi,
> This is an early RFC to make sure I don't go too far in the wrong direction.
>
> Non-coherent GPUs that can't directly see contents in
On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 12:54:28PM -0800, John Stultz wrote:
> Here is a initial RFC of the dma-buf heaps patchset Andrew and I
> have been working on which tries to destage a fair chunk of ION
> functionality.
>
> The patchset implements per-heap devices which can be opened
> directly and then
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 01:19:09PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:58 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:40:37PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:30 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > >
&
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:40:37PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:30 PM Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:15:55PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:04 PM wrote:
> > > >
> > >
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:15:55PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:04 PM wrote:
> >
> > From: Jérôme Glisse
> >
> > Since last version [4] i added the extra bits needed for the change_pte
> > optimization (which is a KSM thing). Here i am not posting users of
> > this,
On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 10:02:30PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 31-01-19 11:10:06, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > Andrew what is your plan for this ? I had a discussion with Peter Xu
> > and Andrea about change_pte() and kvm. Today the change_pte() kvm
> > optimizat
On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 12:09:08PM +0100, Krzysztof Grygiencz wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> I'm using ArchLinux distribution. After kernel upgrade form 4.19.14 to
> 4.19.15 my X environment stopped working. I have AMD HD3300 (RS780D)
> graphics card. I have bisected kernel and found a failing commit:
>
1 - 100 of 1383 matches
Mail list logo
