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 F04DEC10F1A for ; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:52:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 40ED96B007B; Thu, 9 May 2024 04:52:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 3BDED6B0082; Thu, 9 May 2024 04:52:28 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 2ACA36B0088; Thu, 9 May 2024 04:52:28 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ACA46B007B for ; Thu, 9 May 2024 04:52:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70DB7C12FF for ; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:52:27 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82098241134.06.44C2214 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) by imf15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A1E3A0016 for ; Thu, 9 May 2024 08:52:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf15.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf15.hostedemail.com: domain of linmiaohe@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linmiaohe@huawei.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1715244745; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=HcgwWF7Ce/bMKEkvmpUukKLsp/28ESnvaQh/uqoYUjU=; b=2kn86T1VXy/SBD53ka2lWGMjFB754XuwRfIIlB6y/olfQvgQOd497Y7klOYSM7t49cD2s2 aZItMBJazLf28WAtX9XiQ0KBTSZXRbqWEGlhRI8i5cOk7bBPZNjUf1n9QSR3YdkpUbK0Nr AOM0KS/rmV3OCNbFCuI8t2PS8jOH1cM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf15.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf15.hostedemail.com: domain of linmiaohe@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linmiaohe@huawei.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1715244745; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=kpt/DZdP4rPU2qshOYxoI9IelQqYZ04JIVQT7jAL+UbrED62i8HHfooA5YaGTgr1FZy3Th ZD+uziyT+sCd2pjGsZM4UQqeRPHSI5H9VnEOZAS1zIJR/rm3GlSjraHdtWcCgHg8C/mPL1 hB8VBaHpEDeH3uFJXFgVMWqwOX1NHh8= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.48]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4VZlzs1QQJzvXbS; Thu, 9 May 2024 16:48:57 +0800 (CST) Received: from canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.192.104.244]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6099C18007E; Thu, 9 May 2024 16:52:18 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.173.135.154] (10.173.135.154) by canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.244) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Thu, 9 May 2024 16:52:17 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/memory-failure: send SIGBUS in the event of thp split fail To: Jane Chu , , , , References: <20240501232458.3919593-1-jane.chu@oracle.com> <20240501232458.3919593-4-jane.chu@oracle.com> <2e51deff-24ca-32d5-dbd2-9077f860723c@huawei.com> <56448498-96e4-4350-a915-15b97294bc62@oracle.com> From: Miaohe Lin Message-ID: <9092ae5b-4910-95c6-14b6-a884f6fa9361@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 16:52:17 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56448498-96e4-4350-a915-15b97294bc62@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.173.135.154] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.181) To canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.244) X-Stat-Signature: 8gx5187yff956b1kgykbuxx6475m49qe X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 8A1E3A0016 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-HE-Tag: 1715244744-233143 X-HE-Meta: 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 g+u1NCR2 fEafH7kLEsrFooeGMJtds1sd0YeXurocnl+p+ikFlOAUnbUBzZXISOz44LTWHV1IFR4jWrWGFMU/KsdS10mwRbIKqHXCVMraqcipasCMZRRU33l04WTYtRqCwirhW7UgQtoGBfQCn3KOcQT9mczKRDR6k58jYJW/Z211TEXO1FZUMLXjbXTc6LG7/FuOpxTl3A/W1uKNp+H139OeJYNqHy/lGaP3pISZSCVlJdkc7OY5Olo2Oar8cA6HD89KncHLHaqy4 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 2024/5/9 0:56, Jane Chu wrote: > On 5/8/2024 2:03 AM, Miaohe Lin wrote: > >> On 2024/5/2 7:24, Jane Chu wrote: >>> When handle hwpoison in a GUP longterm pin'ed thp page, >>> try_to_split_thp_page() will fail. And at this point, there is little else >>> the kernel could do except sending a SIGBUS to the user process, thus >>> give it a chance to recover. >> It seems the user process will still receive SIGBUS via kill_accessing_process() >> when (re-)access thp later. So they should have a chance to recover already. >> Or am I miss something? > > The concern is about real UE consumption in which case, it's desirable to kill the process ASAP without having to relying on subsequent access.  Also to honor processes' MCE-early-kill request. kill_accessing_process() is very conservative in that, it doesn't check other processes that have the poisoned page mapped. I see. Thanks for your explanation. Thanks. . > > thanks, > > -jane > >> >> Thanks. >> . >> >> > .