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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 0256AC2D0DB for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 13:48:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C22DB2082E for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 13:48:40 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C22DB2082E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3E3226B0356; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 08:48:40 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 36D2C6B0357; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 08:48:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 2356F6B0358; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 08:48:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0142.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.142]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092CB6B0356 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 08:48:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin29.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C26B3181AC9CB for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 13:48:39 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76434430758.29.week92_11603724c6a53 X-HE-Tag: week92_11603724c6a53 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4262 Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com (mail-wr1-f68.google.com [209.85.221.68]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 13:48:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id b6so4180661wrq.0 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 05:48:39 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=00TW30GXnTchBcJdUYdFPpb46wffdSf5UKCwVXDKN08=; b=pbUsA+nHDtoFoCwWNoUNgXR30yJZBhnWhbI2o4GSGX5BJ6BC9JFKACSvqaqxZ13YKJ c1f0FtidU/cUonFQBQVkeuNBDe0HGvK9Acq6kIjYvvjM+QZ2bhmz+VSZphvJaMGqmaet qGp06kiSogD/ZwKKwPHLBoZPEA6/lwOa7tdzVPUdd7o+BmdpHQy97zyjYlpuZg2fOhy5 Wxb3CXNkEuctYxMo6PEuxGHi9SBNgCE22kAbBexI3izeRz3dUEzKd2tQOiDNPN1IEVd1 cHodEZ/58SVOYxn5LWb0/vozMzGmdYtd4uQ/r/DGF/Y05kfFXlxvq8dWCZbTVhTy6aYQ 9YLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUBcw7x7WGDrk/ROIEOfWk0Hh0R72e9OWPnUhFidWU/0O1kcKYv IdonlIBX3lESveOfPHsoFtk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwyFFb/4w3ky0siaqshpp366LIav0VnlYma8y80+MVjrW2dY7ouDbndARfIrS0U+5ILAfQejg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:45c4:: with SMTP id b4mr5620505wrs.303.1580392118099; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 05:48:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (prg-ext-pat.suse.com. [213.151.95.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o7sm6357958wmh.11.2020.01.30.05.48.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 30 Jan 2020 05:48:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 14:48:35 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: Yang Shi , mtk.manpages@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-man@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] move_pages.2: Returning positive value is a new error case Message-ID: <20200130134835.GW24244@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1580334531-80354-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com> <20200130120253.GU24244@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 Thu 30-01-20 13:56:20, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 1/30/20 1:02 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 30-01-20 10:06:28, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > >> On 1/29/20 10:48 PM, Yang Shi wrote: > >>> Since commit a49bd4d71637 ("mm, numa: rework do_pages_move"), > >>> the semantic of move_pages() has changed to return the number of > >>> non-migrated pages if they were result of a non-fatal reasons (usually a > >>> busy page). This was an unintentional change that hasn't been noticed > >>> except for LTP tests which checked for the documented behavior. > >>> > >>> There are two ways to go around this change. We can even get back to the > >>> original behavior and return -EAGAIN whenever migrate_pages is not able > >> > >> The manpage says EBUSY, not EAGAIN? And should its description be > >> updated too? > > > > The idea was that we _could_ return EAGAIN from the syscall if > > migrate_pages > 0. > > > >> I.e. that it's no longer returned since 4.17? > > > > I am pretty sure this will require a deeper consideration. Do we return > > EIO/EINVAL? > > I thought the manpage says we return -EBUSY, but I misread it, this part > was not about errno, but the status array. So there's nothing to update > there, sorry about the noise. > > BTW, the suggestion to "Pre-initialization of the array to -1" means > effectively it's pre-initialized to -EPERM. That's fine now as -EPERM is > not one of the codes listed as possible to be returned via the array, > but perhaps it's not entirely future-proof? Hmm, I didn't realize EPERM is refering to 1. The wording however suggests also any other value that cannot represent a valid NUMA node. So maybe we should just drop the node about -1. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs