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 2C3F6D743D8 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 21:20:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 6C1536B008A; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:20:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 671BF6B0092; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:20:15 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 5396F6B0093; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:20:15 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3137D6B008A for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:20:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F5EA09AA for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 21:20:14 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82807739952.10.F46B967 Received: from out-172.mta0.migadu.com (out-172.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.172]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7017680013 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 21:18:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=XcEBO3Bz; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of kent.overstreet@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.172 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kent.overstreet@linux.dev ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1732137546; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=SKG9Y+49cv4/Nmcnr2h/4Elo9m33hRLUb1ixl10ZplsbhkVk308FoH4smM2gHdqzlDdoOT A75PNmYg9UjQumuSStmkf24Mt5mzAaSzk8G229J1ARLZys+0+m5Bn6z1mOau8MZBGN7QHL Wzgx/GERjUh1B2AzuBkcj330+GtZdAw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=XcEBO3Bz; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of kent.overstreet@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.172 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kent.overstreet@linux.dev ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1732137546; 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:dkim-signature; bh=MK7Yw13rIPAR5mXF8jT4hgAQAmxv6k0/U0gtqc/SGbE=; b=5QFyzcufT3jk/3bAAUXwsLcChrvHvHyjpqRsq/4cpgpnx3vLbO6dVApMvAeGj6xVAv2DQ/ WXvVyGaY6R6Ozu+c5w/FOo86j4VeqY2LYm+T6U9THoDNTgqWYs8TvBYuxr8hnAh4PNy+6q pDncyS4Lta1wW5lEtzYC9jcmHBXG41I= Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:20:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1732137610; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=MK7Yw13rIPAR5mXF8jT4hgAQAmxv6k0/U0gtqc/SGbE=; b=XcEBO3BzCSx7AHhL9v/iGMOfgQ/Gkv5yqDMeO5LS0VgHj9PiFQPJbX5bKxpmIwstoRIgF7 7YTt9ibeyAobYGlgyhKU8hl1BZ+YwYRglYuO6FeIqDsEdGnDkZbVPgsxPPnYZg/fN4UegY 0Lk8vOwYMtA/cq7HF3t0VDqIg8loWvM= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Kent Overstreet To: Shuah Khan Cc: Michal Hocko , Dave Chinner , Andrew Morton , Christoph Hellwig , Yafang Shao , jack@suse.cz, Christian Brauner , Alexander Viro , Paul Moore , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "conduct@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] bcachefs: do not use PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM Message-ID: References: <22a3da3d-6bca-48c6-a36f-382feb999374@linuxfoundation.org> <71b51954-15ba-4e73-baea-584463d43a5c@linuxfoundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <71b51954-15ba-4e73-baea-584463d43a5c@linuxfoundation.org> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7017680013 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Stat-Signature: yfwgm7p711aki8fcy7wped9xmz5o5sgr X-HE-Tag: 1732137514-381157 X-HE-Meta: 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 HpkVOKcD PnU21Xqm4HvJHJ0CQ5F4zYkvLgiNCwubQGIw+WXtZ7CfsqZgB28eQk5Tw0dsxzyG0893+1xz3j0ESoRh0mmk8qPiOZd+xsKPlXYwx9sswCL26/0BH2MUMaJ4qf0YFQKphNQaRnO3NFNGUgP5gPfLPZnwW7NHm74zd8xdRd0O9eiPs5zWhmrvsRKLHshWoMOWW2d7eU0t/WoqeI1BJ2rvV2C1lS1/s0uOB3J6pJMp7fvDw2YRAZDu28nb5gUlFCGXsjZreEPRtnY6QeUJn3CBUw7Sf770zJm6D6Gm2VnwvbGQonGgXofiyaLXLd1Q6ZWPOiV2DjpBNRUeHFUMNzGlTo6RfC33BH+7Ddn2s3r4khcgTXe9OFbX7756RhA5BtstaLG2q 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 Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 02:12:12PM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 11/20/24 13:34, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 12:01:50PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > > > On 9/2/24 03:51, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 11:39:41AM GMT, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > On Mon 02-09-24 04:52:49, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 10:41:31AM GMT, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun 01-09-24 21:35:30, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > But I am saying that kmalloc(__GFP_NOFAIL) _should_ fail and return NULL > > > > > > > > in the case of bugs, because that's going to be an improvement w.r.t. > > > > > > > > system robustness, in exactly the same way we don't use BUG_ON() if it's > > > > > > > > something that we can't guarantee won't happen in the wild - we WARN() > > > > > > > > and try to handle the error as best we can. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have discussed that in a different email thread. And I have to say > > > > > > > that I am not convinced that returning NULL makes a broken code much > > > > > > > better. Why? Because we can expect that broken NOFAIL users will not have a > > > > > > > error checking path. Even valid NOFAIL users will not have one because > > > > > > > they _know_ they do not have a different than retry for ever recovery > > > > > > > path. > > > > > > > > > > > > You mean where I asked you for a link to the discussion and rationale > > > > > > you claimed had happened? Still waiting on that > > > > > > > > > > I am not your assistent to be tasked and search through lore archives. > > > > > Find one if you need that. > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you read the email and even tried to understand what is > > > > > written there rather than immediately started shouting a response then > > > > > you would have noticed I have put actual arguments here. You are free to > > > > > disagree with them and lay down your arguments. You have decided to > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, enough of this insanity. > > > > > > > > > > so I do not think you are able to do that. Again... > > > > > > > > Michal, if you think crashing processes is an acceptable alternative to > > > > error handling _you have no business writing kernel code_. > > > > > > > > You have been stridently arguing for one bad idea after another, and > > > > it's an insult to those of us who do give a shit about writing reliable > > > > software. > > > > > > > > You're arguing against basic precepts of kernel programming. > > > > > > > > Get your head examined. And get the fuck out of here with this shit. > > > > > > > > > > Kent, > > > > > > Using language like this is clearly unacceptable and violates the > > > Code of Conduct. This type of language doesn't promote respectful > > > and productive discussions and is detrimental to the health of the > > > community. > > > > > > You should be well aware that this type of language and personal > > > attack is a clear violation of the Linux kernel Contributor Covenant > > > Code of Conduct as outlined in the following: > > > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/code-of-conduct.html > > > > > > Refer to the Code of Conduct and refrain from violating the Code of > > > Conduct in the future. > > > > I believe Michal and I have more or less worked this out privately (and > > you guys have been copied on that as well). > > Thank you for updating us on the behind the scenes work between you > and Michal. > > I will make one correction to your statement, "you guys have been copied on > that as well" - which is inaccurate. You have shared your email exchanges > with Michal with us to let us know that the issue has been sorted out. That seems to be what I just said. > You might have your reasons and concerns about the direction of the code > and design that pertains to the discussion in this email thread. You might > have your reasons for expressing your frustration. However, those need to be > worked out as separate from this Code of Conduct violation. > > In the case of unacceptable behaviors as defined in the Code of Conduct > document, the process is to work towards restoring productive and > respectful discussions. It is reasonable to ask for an apology to help > us get to the goal as soon as possible. > > I urge you once again to apologize for using language that negatively impacts > productive discussions. Shuah, I'd be happy to give you that after the discussion I suggested. Failing that, I urge you to stick to what we agreed to last night.