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;
Date:   Tue, 9 Mar 2021 14:38:06 +0800
From:   Aili Yao <yaoaili@kingsoft.com>
To:     "HORIGUCHI =?UTF-8?B?TkFPWUE=?=(=?UTF-8?B?5aCA5Y+j44CA55u05Lmf?=)" 
        <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>
CC:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
        "david@redhat.com" <david@redhat.com>,
        "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "yangfeng1@kingsoft.com" <yangfeng1@kingsoft.com>,
        <yaoaili@kingsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memory-failure: Use a mutex to avoid
 memory_failure() races
Message-ID: <20210309143806.344fe894@alex-virtual-machine>
In-Reply-To: <20210309060440.GA29668@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
References: <20210304144524.795872d7@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210304235720.GA215567@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
        <20210305093016.40c87375@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210305093656.6c262b19@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210305221143.GA220893@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
        <20210308064558.GA3617@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
        <3690ece2101d428fb9067fcd2a423ff8@intel.com>
        <20210308223839.GA21886@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
        <20210308225504.GA233893@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
        <20210309100421.3d09b6b1@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210309060440.GA29668@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
Organization: kingsoft
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 06:04:41 +0000
HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口　直也) <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com> wrote:

> ...
> > 
> > If others are OK with this method, then I am OK too.
> > But I have two concerns, May you take into account:
> > 
> > 1. The memory_failure with 0 return code for race condition, then the kill_me_maybe() goes into branch:
> > 	if (!memory_failure(p->mce_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT, flags) &&
> > 	    !(p->mce_kflags & MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN)) {
> > 		set_mce_nospec(p->mce_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT, p->mce_whole_page);
> > 		sync_core();
> > 		return;
> > 	}
> > 
> > while we place set_mce_nospec() here is for a reason, please see commit fd0e786d9d09024f67b.
> > 
> > 2. When memory_failure return 0 and maybe return to user process, and it may re-execute the instruction triggering previous fault, this behavior
> > assume an implicit dependence that the related pte has been correctly set. or if not correctlily set, it will lead to infinite loop again.  
> 
> These seem to be separate issues from memory_failure()'s concurrency issue,
> so I'm still expecting that your patch is to be merged. Maybe do you want
> to update it based on the discussion (if it's concluded)?
> 
> Thanks,
> Naoya Horiguchi

I have submitted a v2 patch, and please help review.

Thanks!
 
-- 
Thanks!
Aili Yao