From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f71.google.com (mail-wm0-f71.google.com [74.125.82.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72FAE6B027E for ; Tue, 22 May 2018 07:45:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-f71.google.com with SMTP id 74-v6so5698678wme.0 for ; Tue, 22 May 2018 04:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com. [148.163.158.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a19-v6si10620382wmg.68.2018.05.22.04.45.03 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 22 May 2018 04:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w4MBcwBZ043150 for ; Tue, 22 May 2018 07:45:02 -0400 Received: from e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.109]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2j4grrn2kq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 22 May 2018 07:45:02 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 22 May 2018 12:45:00 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 01/26] mm: introduce CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT References: <1526555193-7242-1-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1526555193-7242-2-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <2cb8256d-5822-d94d-b0e6-c46f21d84852@infradead.org> <20180517171951.GB26718@bombadil.infradead.org> From: Laurent Dufour Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 13:44:48 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180517171951.GB26718@bombadil.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <9a95bb6b-78cb-52a6-9c3a-4869f7cdb079@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Matthew Wilcox , Randy Dunlap Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, kirill@shutemov.name, ak@linux.intel.com, dave@stgolabs.net, jack@suse.cz, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , hpa@zytor.com, Will Deacon , Sergey Senozhatsky , sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, Andrea Arcangeli , Alexei Starovoitov , kemi.wang@intel.com, Daniel Jordan , David Rientjes , Jerome Glisse , Ganesh Mahendran , Minchan Kim , Punit Agrawal , vinayak menon , Yang Shi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Tim Chen , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org On 17/05/2018 19:19, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 09:36:00AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: >>> + If the speculative page fault fails because of a concurrency is >> >> because a concurrency is > > While one can use concurrency as a noun, it sounds archaic to me. I'd > rather: > > If the speculative page fault fails because a concurrent modification > is detected or because underlying PMD or PTE tables are not yet Thanks Matthew, I'll do that. > >>> + detected or because underlying PMD or PTE tables are not yet >>> + allocating, it is failing its processing and a classic page fault >> >> allocated, the speculative page fault fails and a classic page fault >> >>> + is then tried. >