From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Linux MM" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"DRI Development" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"Intel Graphics Development" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"Chris Wilson" <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David Rientjes" <rientjes@google.com>,
"Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.com>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm, notifier: Add a lockdep map for invalidate_range_start/end
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:31:06 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190820133106.GE29246@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190820081902.24815-2-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:18:59AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> This is a similar idea to the fs_reclaim fake lockdep lock. It's
> fairly easy to provoke a specific notifier to be run on a specific
> range: Just prep it, and then munmap() it.
>
> A bit harder, but still doable, is to provoke the mmu notifiers for
> all the various callchains that might lead to them. But both at the
> same time is really hard to reliable hit, especially when you want to
> exercise paths like direct reclaim or compaction, where it's not
> easy to control what exactly will be unmapped.
>
> By introducing a lockdep map to tie them all together we allow lockdep
> to see a lot more dependencies, without having to actually hit them
> in a single challchain while testing.
>
> On Jason's suggestion this is is rolled out for both
> invalidate_range_start and invalidate_range_end. They both have the
> same calling context, hence we can share the same lockdep map. Note
> that the annotation for invalidate_ranage_start is outside of the
> mm_has_notifiers(), to make sure lockdep is informed about all paths
> leading to this context irrespective of whether mmu notifiers are
> present for a given context. We don't do that on the
> invalidate_range_end side to avoid paying the overhead twice, there
> the lockdep annotation is pushed down behind the mm_has_notifiers()
> check.
>
> v2: Use lock_map_acquire/release() like fs_reclaim, to avoid confusion
> with this being a real mutex (Chris Wilson).
>
> v3: Rebase on top of Glisse's arg rework.
>
> v4: Also annotate invalidate_range_end (Jason Gunthorpe)
> Also annotate invalidate_range_start_nonblock, I somehow missed that
> one in the first version.
>
> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Cc: "Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> ---
> include/linux/mmu_notifier.h | 8 ++++++++
> mm/mmu_notifier.c | 9 +++++++++
> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+)
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-20 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-20 8:18 [PATCH 0/4] mmu notifier debug annotations/checks Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 8:18 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm, notifier: Add a lockdep map for invalidate_range_start/end Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 13:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2019-08-20 8:19 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm, notifier: Prime lockdep Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 13:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-20 8:19 ` [PATCH 3/4] kernel.h: Add non_block_start/end() Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 20:24 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-22 23:14 ` Andrew Morton
2019-08-23 8:34 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-23 12:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-23 12:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-23 13:42 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-23 14:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-23 15:15 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-23 8:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-20 8:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm, notifier: Catch sleeping/blocking for !blockable Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 13:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-20 15:18 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 15:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-21 9:34 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 15:41 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 16:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-22 8:42 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-22 14:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-22 14:27 ` Daniel Vetter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190820133106.GE29246@ziepe.ca \
--to=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox