Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-01-15 11:54:15)
>
> On 14/01/2019 21:17, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > -static int i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier
> > *_mn,
> > - const struct mmu_notifier_range *range)
> > +static struct mutex
On 14/01/2019 21:17, Chris Wilson wrote:
Since commit 93065ac753e4 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu
notifiers") we have been able to report failure from
mmu_invalidate_range_start which allows us to use a trylock on the
struct_mutex to avoid potential recursion and report -EBUSY
On 15/01/2019 10:00, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-01-15 09:47:45)
On 14/01/2019 21:17, Chris Wilson wrote:
Since commit 93065ac753e4 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu
notifiers") we have been able to report failure from
mmu_invalidate_range_start which allows
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-01-15 09:47:45)
>
> On 14/01/2019 21:17, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Since commit 93065ac753e4 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu
> > notifiers") we have been able to report failure from
> > mmu_invalidate_range_start which allows us to use a trylock on the
> >
On 14/01/2019 21:17, Chris Wilson wrote:
Since commit 93065ac753e4 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu
notifiers") we have been able to report failure from
mmu_invalidate_range_start which allows us to use a trylock on the
struct_mutex to avoid potential recursion and report -EBUSY
Since commit 93065ac753e4 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu
notifiers") we have been able to report failure from
mmu_invalidate_range_start which allows us to use a trylock on the
struct_mutex to avoid potential recursion and report -EBUSY instead.
Furthermore, this allows us to pull
