Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m35-v6csp1830598imm; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 09:25:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPzXfwcioN0/WVtE3gt0Cr4nhXXX1XKQfmpAyAwl9GllBIoJajGw0goPYD/UbgwxSsw5JbhQ X-Received: by 2002:a62:f909:: with SMTP id o9-v6mr63672534pfh.141.1535041549667; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 09:25:49 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1535041549; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=c7qqisLAHxKPAF5qQYZ3aOzXfqnPLZAX3pWN8rGr8IsyYFJaM4+2zIjYPNsaBBHDcN V0UFOzwGSYcVQLYTGwI+OFZypQeGhOr764Vpm0bzNcYlCwg8+lGjNOf6hEvozZAED0mV OB3oJDThp0mG6w2ljXD96BG25ZcsNHloh2OAUU+9geRSVDLKZtWTwoPHoT+rKW8dCsf1 gtgsNUT4jdISyLWhbu4RafZxJPXFvGmbiH74HnkdmBfBQgBowUfSJmZWODtK6fvqQp3O muI99VYudkSvLkS+XgVllhwsoGHijvw2TdT1nXMLy5ccuJ7E+ibVooPbP1fsrU19UqiG Kp2A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=IeaipDtb/cIpXz6larJ4jG5kKI3xN6QBpwDWfJvyBI4=; b=O5348JnBWQ7nG5AhFl7Z6dTnygNXkErapnuMyLhBF/5ahzcmuzd5fjUyxdA+zYwtAx ZXiXbl/Snkxn84XVdSDmfuRAKaPDb/wZoKQnd994UN2dXOy0FgCZfp3GwWls7YdXqOJ1 Skj+WXhqdzxOv4JbVdqCfIo2Kz2e9WEjGrMnB3DRinYxahFA895QjWK55tOXqxoV5rHy RtEDlHzTzHGpi2OWS6/tMEfWOB/HH1NtobKN6Wt5wXnE4wL5tK7KtvZWDWigDA5Xlev1 82YJd/G9G/wxglEAyzFRXMoId9xk+Jc4rO5EjNNO5cpLFITMu8GJDKJ8v2NN1eIyQZ7c aUzw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n184-v6si4804800pga.98.2018.08.23.09.25.34; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 09:25:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731329AbeHWRVm (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:21:42 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:53470 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730379AbeHWRVm (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:21:42 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B85BDAF7A; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:51:52 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 15:51:51 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Tetsuo Handa Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, LKML , Boris Ostrovsky , Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/gntdev: fix up blockable calls to mn_invl_range_start Message-ID: <20180823135151.GM29735@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20180823120707.10998-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <07c7ead4-334d-9b25-f588-25e9b46bbea0@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <07c7ead4-334d-9b25-f588-25e9b46bbea0@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 23-08-18 22:44:07, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2018/08/23 21:07, Michal Hocko wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/gntdev.c b/drivers/xen/gntdev.c > > index 57390c7666e5..e7d8bb1bee2a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/xen/gntdev.c > > +++ b/drivers/xen/gntdev.c > > @@ -519,21 +519,20 @@ static int mn_invl_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn, > > struct gntdev_grant_map *map; > > int ret = 0; > > > > - /* TODO do we really need a mutex here? */ > > if (blockable) > > mutex_lock(&priv->lock); > > else if (!mutex_trylock(&priv->lock)) > > return -EAGAIN; > > > > list_for_each_entry(map, &priv->maps, next) { > > - if (in_range(map, start, end)) { > > + if (!blockable && in_range(map, start, end)) { > > This still looks strange. Prior to 93065ac753e4, in_range() test was > inside unmap_if_in_range(). But this patch removes in_range() test > if blockable == true. That is, unmap_if_in_range() will unconditionally > unmap if blockable == true, which seems to be an unexpected change. You are right. I completely forgot I've removed in_range there. Does this look any better? diff --git a/drivers/xen/gntdev.c b/drivers/xen/gntdev.c index e7d8bb1bee2a..30f81004ea63 100644 --- a/drivers/xen/gntdev.c +++ b/drivers/xen/gntdev.c @@ -525,14 +525,20 @@ static int mn_invl_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn, return -EAGAIN; list_for_each_entry(map, &priv->maps, next) { - if (!blockable && in_range(map, start, end)) { + if (in_range(map, start, end)) { + if (blockable) + continue; + ret = -EAGAIN; goto out_unlock; } unmap_if_in_range(map, start, end); } list_for_each_entry(map, &priv->freeable_maps, next) { - if (!blockable && in_range(map, start, end)) { + if (in_range(map, start, end)) { + if (blockable) + continue; + ret = -EAGAIN; goto out_unlock; } -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs