From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: uninitialized pmem struct pages
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2021 08:50:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210105075028.GS13207@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4h6mdKrwpqXfO0e_=sKjB-pY5KbP9ii+tQyFsK5bPkb=A@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon 04-01-21 21:17:43, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 2:45 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
[...]
> > I believe Dan mentioned somewhere that he wants to see a real instance
> > of this producing a BUG before actually moving forward with a fix. I
> > might be wrong.
>
> I think I'm missing an argument for the user-visible effects of the
> "Bad." statements above. I think soft_offline_page() is a candidate
> for a local fix because mm/memory-failure.c already has a significant
> amount of page-type specific knowledge. So teaching it "yes" for
> MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE-ZONE_DEVICE and "no" for other ZONE_DEVICE seems
> ok to me.
I believe we do not want to teach _every_ pfn walker about zone device
pages. This would be quite error prone. Especially when a missig check
could lead to a silently broken data or BUG_ON with debugging enabled
(which is not the case for many production users). Or are we talking
about different bugs here?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-05 7:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-04 10:03 Michal Hocko
2021-01-04 10:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-04 14:26 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-04 14:51 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-04 15:10 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-04 15:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-04 15:33 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-04 15:43 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-04 15:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-05 8:00 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-05 8:16 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-05 8:27 ` Dan Williams
2021-01-05 8:42 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-05 8:57 ` Dan Williams
2021-01-05 9:05 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-05 9:13 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-05 9:25 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-05 9:27 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-04 15:59 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-04 16:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-05 7:44 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-05 9:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-05 5:33 ` Dan Williams
2021-01-05 7:40 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-05 5:17 ` Dan Williams
2021-01-05 7:50 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2021-01-05 9:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-05 9:25 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-05 9:33 ` Dan Williams
2021-01-05 9:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-05 9:56 ` Dan Williams
2021-01-05 9:58 ` David Hildenbrand
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=20210105075028.GS13207@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/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