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=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 9282DC433FE for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:36:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E70423B6C for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:36:54 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1E70423B6C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 779E48D0014; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 05:36:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 750128D000B; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 05:36:54 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 641408D0014; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 05:36:54 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0193.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.193]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A3958D000B for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 05:36:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11434181AEF21 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:36:54 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77573390748.08.fifth35_431140e273ef Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E665D1819E769 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:36:53 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: fifth35_431140e273ef X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1555 Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by imf40.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:36:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C18AC94; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:36:52 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 11:36:49 +0100 From: Oscar Salvador To: David Hildenbrand Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com, vbabka@suse.cz, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,hwpoison: Return -EBUSY when migration fails Message-ID: <20201209103649.GD30892@linux> References: <20201209092818.30417-1-osalvador@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) 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 Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 10:59:04AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 09.12.20 10:28, Oscar Salvador wrote: > Do we expect callers to retry immediately? -EAGAIN might make also > sense. But -EBUSY is an obvious improvement. Do we have callers relying > on this behavior? Not really, unless something LTP takes a look at the error code in retries in case EBUSY. Take into account that most of the callers do not even really check the return code (GHES, RAS/CEC, etc.) -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3