On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 10:03:21AM +0200, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:50:18AM +, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > Actually I guess that !pfn_valid() never happens when called from
> > madvise_inject_error(), because madvise_inject_error() gets pfn via
> > get_user_pages_fast()
OK, thanks. I updated it.
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
---
From 5faf227839b578726fe7f5ff414a153abb3b3a31 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Naoya Horiguchi
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:40:53 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] mm, soft-offline: convert parameter to pfn
Currently soft_offline_page() receives struct
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:50:18AM +, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> Actually I guess that !pfn_valid() never happens when called from
> madvise_inject_error(), because madvise_inject_error() gets pfn via
> get_user_pages_fast() which only returns valid page for valid pfn.
>
> And we plan to remove
> +int soft_offline_page(unsigned long pfn, int flags)
> > > > {
> > > > int ret;
> > > > - unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
> > > > + struct page *page;
> > > > + if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
> > >
00:00:00 2001
From: Naoya Horiguchi
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:40:53 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] mm, soft-offline: convert parameter to pfn
Currently soft_offline_page() receives struct page, and its sibling
memory_failure() receives pfn. This discrepancy looks weird and makes
precheck on pfn validity tri
e);
> >+struct page *page;
> >+if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
> >+return -ENXIO;
> >+/* Only online pages can be soft-offlined (esp., not ZONE_DEVICE). */
> >+page = pfn_to_online_page(pfn);
> >+if (!page)
> >+return -EIO;
>
st to soft offlining, memory failure can deal with devmem. So I
think the above makes sense.
OK, so here's the revised one.
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
---
From: Naoya Horiguchi
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 17:00:33 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] mm, soft-offline: convert parameter to pfn
Currently soft_offline_pa
t; pfn);
> >--
> >
> > Or we might have an option to do as memory_failure() does like below:
>
> In contrast to soft offlining, memory failure can deal with devmem. So I
> think the above makes sense.
OK, so here's the revised on
On 16.10.19 10:27, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:56:19AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 16.10.19 09:09, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
Hi,
I wrote a simple cleanup for parameter of soft_offline_page(),
based on thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/10/11/57.
I know that we need
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:56:19AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 16.10.19 09:09, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I wrote a simple cleanup for parameter of soft_offline_page(),
> > based on thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/10/11/57.
> >
> > I know that we need more cleanup on
.
So let me shared only this part as a separate one now.
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
---
From: Naoya Horiguchi
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 15:49:00 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] mm, soft-offline: convert parameter to pfn
Currently soft_offline_page() receives struct page, and its sibling
memory_failure() receives
as a separate one now.
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
---
From: Naoya Horiguchi
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 15:49:00 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] mm, soft-offline: convert parameter to pfn
Currently soft_offline_page() receives struct page, and its sibling
memory_failure() receives pfn. This discrepancy looks weird and makes
12 matches
Mail list logo
