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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 994EBC3276F for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 22:15:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F032253D for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 22:15:40 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 46F032253D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 7C5258E0005; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:15:40 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 775018E0003; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:15:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 68B998E0005; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:15:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0117.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.117]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52D118E0003 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:15:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin14.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F2711181AC9C6 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 22:15:39 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76334101998.14.event40_315e6bd43ec5e X-HE-Tag: event40_315e6bd43ec5e X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3790 Received: from out4436.biz.mail.alibaba.com (out4436.biz.mail.alibaba.com [47.88.44.36]) by imf32.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 22:15:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R231e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e04420;MF=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=11;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0TmgPslx_1578003315; Received: from US-143344MP.local(mailfrom:yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0TmgPslx_1578003315) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Fri, 03 Jan 2020 06:15:24 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] move_pages.2: not return ENOENT if the page are already on the target nodes To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Michal Hocko , John Hubbard , "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" , cl@linux.com, cai@lca.pw, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-man@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1575596090-115377-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com> <0dc96e40-5f2b-a2fe-6e5f-b6f3d5e9ebde@nvidia.com> <95170ea5-5b62-9168-fcd9-93b43330a1b4@linux.alibaba.com> <092adc11-7039-9343-7067-0e0199c9dc13@gmail.com> <51dd767a-221f-882d-c7f6-45bd0c217a67@nvidia.com> <20191218101711.GB21485@dhcp22.suse.cz> <0059a598-5726-2488-cd37-b4b7f9b3353e@linux.alibaba.com> <87lfqtcfyo.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> From: Yang Shi Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2020 14:15:12 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87lfqtcfyo.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US 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: On 12/30/19 7:49 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Yang Shi writes: > >> On 12/18/19 2:17 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> On Tue 17-12-19 23:36:09, John Hubbard wrote: >>> [...] >>>> diff --git a/man2/move_pages.2 b/man2/move_pages.2 >>>> index 2d96468fa..1bf1053f2 100644 >>>> --- a/man2/move_pages.2 >>>> +++ b/man2/move_pages.2 >>>> @@ -191,12 +191,6 @@ was specified or an attempt was made to migrate pages of a kernel thread. >>>> .B ENODEV >>>> One of the target nodes is not online. >>>> .TP >>>> -.B ENOENT >>>> -No pages were found that require moving. >>>> -All pages are either already >>>> -on the target node, not present, had an invalid address or could not be >>>> -moved because they were mapped by multiple processes. >>>> -.TP >>>> .B EPERM >>>> The caller specified >>>> .B MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL >>>> >>>> ...But I'm not sure if we should change the implementation, instead, so >>>> that it *can* return ENOENT. That's the main question to resolve before >>>> creating any more patches, I think. >>> I would start by dropping any note about ENOENT first. I am not really >>> sure there is a reasonable usecase for it but maybe somebody comes up >>> with something and only then we should consider it. >>> >>> Feel free to add >>> Acked-by: Michal Hocko >>> >>> ideally with a kernel commit which removed the ENOENT. >> A quick audit doesn't show kernel code or comment notes about ENOENT >> wrongly. The status could be set as ENOENT if the page is not present >> (follow_page() returns NULL), and man page does match what kernel >> does. > Doesn't the function one layer up then consume the ENOENT? No, it doesn't. The return value would be reset unconditionally by store_status(). This is what the man page patch tries to correct. > > Eric