On Mon 10-10-16 09:28:28, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 09:47:12AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Yeah, so my cleanups where mostly concerned about mmap_sem locking and
> > reducing number of places which cared about those. Regarding flags for
> > get_user_pages() / get_vaddr_frames(
On Fri 07-10-16 11:16:26, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:34:15AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > Would you be willing to look at doing that kind of purely syntactic,
> > > non-semantic cleanup first?
> >
> > Sure, more than happy
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 09:47:12AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Yeah, so my cleanups where mostly concerned about mmap_sem locking and
> reducing number of places which cared about those. Regarding flags for
> get_user_pages() / get_vaddr_frames(), I agree that using flags argument
> as Linus suggests
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 11:16:26AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> Adding Jan Kara (and Dave Hansen) to the Cc list: I think they were
> pursuing get_user_pages() cleanups last year (which would remove the
> force option from most callers anyway), and I've lost track of where
> that all got to. Lor
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:34:15AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Would you be willing to look at doing that kind of purely syntactic,
> > non-semantic cleanup first?
>
> Sure, more than happy to do that! I'll work on a patch for this.
>
> > I think
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:34:15AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Would you be willing to look at doing that kind of purely syntactic,
> non-semantic cleanup first?
Sure, more than happy to do that! I'll work on a patch for this.
> I think that if we end up having the FOLL_FORCE semantics, we're
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:07 AM, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>
> So I've experimented with this a little locally, removing FOLL_FORCE
> altogether
> and tracking places where it is used (it seems to be a fair few places
> actually.)
I'm actually a bit worried that it is used too much simply because
it
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 03:50:21PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I'd really like to re-open the "drop FOLL_FORCE entirely" discussion,
> because the thing really is disgusting.
>
> I realize that debuggers etc sometimes would want to punch through
> PROT_NONE protections, and I also realize that r
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> Reading the code for a little bit, it looks like get_user_pages
> interprets both PROT_NONE and PAGE_NUMA ptes as present, and will
> simply return the page to the caller.
So the thing is, I don't think the code should even get that far.
I
On Sun, 2016-09-25 at 15:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Rik van Riel
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The patch looks good to me, too.
> >
> > Acked-by: Rik van Riel
>
> Thanks, amended the commit since I hadn't pushed out yet.
>
> Btw, the only reason this bug could
On Sun, 25 Sep 2016, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> > The patch looks good to me, too.
> >
> > Acked-by: Rik van Riel
>
> Thanks, amended the commit since I hadn't pushed out yet.
>
> Btw, the only reason this bug could happen is that we do th
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> The patch looks good to me, too.
>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel
Thanks, amended the commit since I hadn't pushed out yet.
Btw, the only reason this bug could happen is that we do that
"force=1" for remote vm accesses, which turns into FOLL_FO
On Sun, 2016-09-25 at 13:52 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I was kind of assuming this would go through the normal channels for
> THP patches, but it's been two weeks...
>
> Can I have an ACK from the involved people, and I'll apply it
> directly.. Mel? Rik?
Sorry about that, I was a little distr
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> Can I have an ACK from the involved people, and I'll apply it
> directly.. Mel? Rik?
Oh well. The patch looks fine to me and I want to include it in the
rc8 release, so I'll apply it. Worst comes to worst we can revert, but
I can confirm
I was kind of assuming this would go through the normal channels for
THP patches, but it's been two weeks...
Can I have an ACK from the involved people, and I'll apply it
directly.. Mel? Rik?
Linus
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> Just a quick ping o
Just a quick ping on this, let me know if you need anything more from me!
Thanks, Lorenzo
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 11:54:25PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> The NUMA balancing logic uses an arch-specific PROT_NONE page table flag
> defined
> by pte_protnone() or pmd_protnone() to mark PTEs or hu
[adding lkml, accidentally excluded!]
On 11 September 2016 at 23:54, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> The NUMA balancing logic uses an arch-specific PROT_NONE page table flag
> defined
> by pte_protnone() or pmd_protnone() to mark PTEs or huge page PMDs
> respectively
> as requiring balancing upon a su
17 matches
Mail list logo
