Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+CK2bCc9gk3Yy+ueaZVJs90MFE3fqukLsdb5R2kTUH4tWRbkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <447A41F3-EB94-4DA4-8B98-038B127774A5@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <447A41F3-EB94-4DA4-8B98-038B127774A5@redhat.com>
From:   Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Dec 2020 18:00:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+CK2bAok_0Q+AovxVYqtsObVbbxr+ZZcTgP76uxEvDy-uJWsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] mm/gup: migrate pinned pages out of movable zone
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
        Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, mike.kravetz@oracle.com,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

> I guess revert what we did (unpin) and return an error. The interesting question is what can make migration/isolation fail

OK. I will make the necessary changes. Let's handle errors properly.
Whatever the cause for the error, we will know it when it happens, and
when error is returned. I think I will add a 10-time retry instead of
the infinite retry that we currently have. The 10-times retry we
currently have during the hot-remove path.

>
> a) out of memory: smells like a zone setup issue. Failures are acceptable I guess.
>
> b) short term pinnings: process dying - not relevant I guess. Other cases? (Fork?)
>
> c) ?
>
> Once we clarified that, we actually know how likely it will be to return an error (and making vfio pinnings fail etc).