From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f72.google.com (mail-it0-f72.google.com [209.85.214.72]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8876D6B000E for ; Tue, 22 May 2018 12:42:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-it0-f72.google.com with SMTP id r76-v6so414446itc.0 for ; Tue, 22 May 2018 09:42:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ale.deltatee.com (ale.deltatee.com. [207.54.116.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t124-v6si254401itf.105.2018.05.22.09.42.37 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 22 May 2018 09:42:37 -0700 (PDT) References: <152694211402.5484.2277538346144115181.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <152694212460.5484.13180030631810166467.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20180521161026.709d5f2876e44f151da3d179@linux-foundation.org> From: Logan Gunthorpe Message-ID: <860a8c46-5171-78ac-0255-ee1d21b16ce8@deltatee.com> Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:42:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, devm_memremap_pages: handle errors allocating final devres action Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dan Williams , Andrew Morton Cc: stable , Christoph Hellwig , =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgR2xpc3Nl?= , Linux MM , Linux Kernel Mailing List Hey Dan, On 21/05/18 06:07 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > Without this change we could fail to register the teardown of > devm_memremap_pages(). The likelihood of hitting this failure is tiny > as small memory allocations almost always succeed. However, the impact > of the failure is large given any future reconfiguration, or > disable/enable, of an nvdimm namespace will fail forever as subsequent > calls to devm_memremap_pages() will fail to setup the pgmap_radix > since there will be stale entries for the physical address range. Sorry, I don't follow this. The change only seems to prevent a warning from occurring in this situation. Won't pgmap_radix_release() still be called regardless of whether this patch is applied? But it looks to me like this patch doesn't quite solve the issue -- at least when looking at dax/pmem.c: If devm_add_action_or_reset() fails, then dax_pmem_percpu_kill() won't be registered as an action and the percpu_ref will never get killed. Thus, dax_pmem_percpu_release() would not get called and dax_pmem_percpu_exit() will hang waiting for a completion that will never occur. So we probably need to add a kill call somewhere on the failing path... Logan