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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E24ADE7716C for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2024 15:35:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3B5556B0144; Thu, 5 Dec 2024 10:19:32 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id BE6E66B0100; Thu, 5 Dec 2024 10:19:27 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 83D4F6B011D; Thu, 5 Dec 2024 10:19:14 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A8026B0082 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 01:07:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin13.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16090A0A2D for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 06:07:18 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82848986052.13.24313A3 Received: from mail02.habana.ai (habanamailrelay02.habana.ai [62.90.112.121]) by imf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C466220011 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 06:07:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=fail (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of dafna.hirschfeld@intel.com does not designate 62.90.112.121 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=dafna.hirschfeld@intel.com; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=intel.com (policy=none) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1733119628; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=OlwroZU169L3UMd1fCuHePx+Dl9jqNU3K0AYWEaI+8Y=; b=2VZJe+1whcKqB1bmgfNsdxCoz/GxtGQuLYltWtbDgPm6Gak9RRTPDNYZjkLeVgccL1qogk J7zTaOjxizc+K/lW/wXQduJDK+IzS01G+v0d/7jed28GYYK4Xo/EkKZpIBJ9LFxW4kcK9L soDt5S253p1ZxdGvg/+S25P3KszxqIo= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1733119628; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=FwjYyNfeOI/3t/3MNZH8e7z6ukuAadUNbxsDNCBCIV9ZZf48BsXNifOcD6Rd5v4nDDfWxc 1dfmOBc5F6DnpYt0GSgLfgRJ1eoUs1IvJz1om5nX250sZsca7MJVp5vrDkyySlX9lyaPuQ IoEL/onyzFoGX5u7/aSEyJcCnN0CtKU= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=fail (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of dafna.hirschfeld@intel.com does not designate 62.90.112.121 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=dafna.hirschfeld@intel.com; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=intel.com (policy=none) Received: internal info suppressed Received: from dhirschfeld-vm-u22.habana-labs.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhirschfeld-vm-u22.habana-labs.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-22ubuntu3) with SMTP id 4B266wmf1546384; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 08:07:03 +0200 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 08:06:58 +0200 From: Dafna Hirschfeld To: Muchun Song Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: change ENOSPC to ENOMEM in alloc_hugetlb_folio Message-ID: <4rosohzhwci3jqneibltem3ax222po45jaiwsftb6lzw3d4kv7@xg3jpkempkg3> References: <20241201010341.1382431-1-dafna.hirschfeld@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: C466220011 X-Stat-Signature: e678wfi5p8g617d6ynw6kqoiyqod1s3m X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1733119630-198955 X-HE-Meta: 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 zrGWcXrV XkAEexBKwbZ2T/d38Xl7bV6F8L7OfpmeRTiv21RyZuqIBE+PseJYCkxDmnbXgLiMuk3NixGmyF4FvkSvUelC52bmua+t5pOxZ307zQ68zHiGiTDjhURMDNf2bCyPdAzX4vv5Njf+ry1pUurDxshOq02EuTuKrftGNZQi/VnAFGEIwd/pkExqoDbmtEIoOgg8zGLgQUx0Ii5fWKN9o/R8G5lTVM2aeO5VTYAsW3BWZVvNTepQyAzk2SbiwjMDdJ7L3FKUeyD3UR4WFVAf/C2PZhMiqwtEO95Iy/ufqBiwi3SQBw6UuLumJ+RvcVuymEp08P9AYzJzIL2vJyhjbc+mT5E6L3NmlZk0uQpCwVJzLhH6IEGS3afzIS3T7TIlOJmVZyw71 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 02.12.2024 11:49, Muchun Song wrote: > > >> On Dec 1, 2024, at 09:03, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote: >> >> The error ENOSPC is translated in vmf_error to VM_FAULT_SIGBUS which is >> further translated in EFAULT in i.e. pin/get_user_pages. >> But when running out of pages/hugepages we expect to see ENOMEM and >> not EFAULT. > >Hi Dafna, > >Refers to Documentation/mm/hugetlbfs_reserv.rst. I saw: > > If no huge page exists at page fault time, the task is sent > a **SIGBUS** and often dies an unhappy death. > >Seems SIGBUS is expected since it is introduced. Hi, thanks for pointing this out, the question is wheather EFAULT is the expected return code from pin/get_user_pages* funcs in such case. Dafna > >Thanks.