Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 02/15] mm/mmu_notifier: add an interval tree notifier

2019-11-08 Thread Jerome Glisse
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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 02/15] mm/mmu_notifier: add an interval tree notifier

2019-11-07 Thread Jerome Glisse
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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 02/15] mm/mmu_notifier: add an interval tree notifier

2019-11-07 Thread Jerome Glisse
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,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 02/15] mm/mmu_notifier: add an interval tree notifier

2019-11-06 Thread Jerome Glisse
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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-08-24 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 06:40:03PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 24-08-18 11:12:40, Jerome Glisse wrote: > [...] > > I am fine with Michal patch, i already said so couple month ago first time > > this discussion did pop up, Michal you can add: > > > > Reviewe

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-08-24 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:52:25PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2018/08/24 22:32, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 24-08-18 22:02:23, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >> I worry that (currently > >> out-of-tree) users of this API are involving work / recursion. > > > > I do not give a slightest about

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-08-24 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 02:33:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 24-08-18 14:18:44, Christian König wrote: > > Am 24.08.2018 um 14:03 schrieb Michal Hocko: > > > On Fri 24-08-18 13:57:52, Christian König wrote: > > > > Am 24.08.2018 um 13:52 schrieb Michal Hocko: > > > > > On Fri 24-08-18

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-08-24 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 07:54:19PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Two more worries for this patch. [...] > > > --- a/mm/hmm.c > > +++ b/mm/hmm.c > > @@ -177,16 +177,19 @@ static void hmm_release(struct mmu_notifier *mn, > > struct mm_struct *mm) > > up_write(>mirrors_sem); > > } > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-06-22 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 06:42:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > [Resnding with the CC list fixed] > > On Fri 22-06-18 18:40:26, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 22-06-18 12:18:46, Jerome Glisse wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 05:57:16PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >

Re: [Xen-devel] [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH] mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers

2018-06-22 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 05:57:16PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 22-06-18 16:36:49, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Michal Hocko (2018-06-22 16:02:42) > > > Hi, > > > this is an RFC and not tested at all. I am not very familiar with the > > > mmu notifiers semantics very much so this is a