From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CEDEC3A5A3 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:14:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1268233A0 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="JnFvVQX5" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D1268233A0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 72D1D6B0360; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 19:14:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 6DBE46B0361; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 19:14:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 5F1036B0362; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 19:14:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0217.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.217]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 375C06B0360 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 19:14:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin24.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B97AD180AD7C1 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:14:30 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 75851619900.24.shoes49_61891e6e48829 X-HE-Tag: shoes49_61891e6e48829 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3038 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf44.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:14:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from akpm3.svl.corp.google.com (unknown [104.133.8.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E6CC2173E; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:14:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1566515669; bh=vApCOM3H3LWmBhR9eGKlIz7FlGeav7+0V7QMAv0lrz4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=JnFvVQX53Ce1G2PQ2HOdxbB/SubAMwjIprQiE8EBfadRyLGqt1J+ii+olw/j5668Y +QtLBXDlkv6/aLoxjapTqHtWc0fc3gJRJDtnIBEIp+3qWO0oQofuFmpQXuSE4efjH3 lHWO0el4UUudjvso5nDstFN30oxIxxABVA7nHCxs= Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 16:14:28 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Daniel Vetter Cc: LKML , Linux MM , DRI Development , Intel Graphics Development , Daniel Vetter , Jason Gunthorpe , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Michal Hocko , David Rientjes , Christian =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me?= Glisse , Masahiro Yamada , Wei Wang , Andy Shevchenko , Thomas Gleixner , Jann Horn , Feng Tang , Kees Cook , Randy Dunlap , Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] kernel.h: Add non_block_start/end() Message-Id: <20190822161428.c9e4479207386d34745ea111@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20190820202440.GH11147@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <20190820081902.24815-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20190820081902.24815-4-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20190820202440.GH11147@phenom.ffwll.local> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:24:40 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Iirc you've been involved at least somewhat in discussing this. -mm folks > are a bit undecided whether these new non_block semantics are a good idea. > Michal Hocko still is in support, but Andrew Morton and Jason Gunthorpe > are less enthusiastic. Jason said he's ok with merging the hmm side of > this if scheduler folks ack. If not, then I'll respin with the > preempt_disable/enable instead like in v1. I became mollified once Michel explained the rationale. I think it's OK. It's very specific to the oom reaper and hopefully won't be used more widely(?).