search for: vm_fault_retri

In every place where sb_start_pagefault was called now we must manage the error code and return VM_FAULT_RETRY. Signed-off-by: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli at gmail.com> --- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 4 +++- fs/buffer.c | 4 +++- fs/ext4/inode.c | 4 +++- fs/f2fs/file.c | 4 +++- fs/gfs2/file.c | 4 +++- fs/nilfs2/file.c | 4 +++- fs/ocfs2/mmap.c |

Hello Christian K?nig, The patch 141b15e59175: "drm/nouveau: move io_reserve_lru handling into the driver v5" from Aug 21, 2020, leads to the following static checker warning: drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c:148 nouveau_ttm_fault() warn: inconsistent returns '*bo->base.resv'. drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c 126 static vm_fault_t nouveau_ttm_fault(struct

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 08:07:33PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 3:14 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de> wrote: > > > > We should not have two different error codes for the same condition. In > > addition this really complicates the code due to the special handling of > > EAGAIN that drops the mmap_sem due to the FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY

Am 22.01.24 um 04:32 schrieb Xianrong Zhou: > The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults > on a device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does > not make the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only > or dirty catching. What? How do you got to this conclusion? > The first fault only sets up the pte entry which actually is > dirty

"Zhou, Xianrong" <Xianrong.Zhou at amd.com> writes: > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > >> >>>>> The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults on a >> >>>>> device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does not >> >>>>> make the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only or

Device exclusive page table entries are used to prevent CPU access to a page whilst it is being accessed from a device. Typically this is used to implement atomic operations when the underlying bus does not support atomic access. When a CPU thread encounters a device exclusive entry it locks the page and restores the original entry after calling mmu notifiers to signal drivers that exclusive

Am 23.01.24 um 09:33 schrieb Zhou, Xianrong: > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > >>> The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults on a >>> device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does not make >>> the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only or dirty >>> catching. >> What? How do you got to this conclusion?

Am 24.01.24 um 03:43 schrieb Zhou, Xianrong: > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > >>>>> The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults on a >>>>> device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does not make >>>>> the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only or dirty >>>>> catching. >>>>

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 3:14 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de> wrote: > > We should not have two different error codes for the same condition. In > addition this really complicates the code due to the special handling of > EAGAIN that drops the mmap_sem due to the FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY logic > in the core vm. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch at

Device exclusive page table entries are used to prevent CPU access to a page whilst it is being accessed from a device. Typically this is used to implement atomic operations when the underlying bus does not support atomic access. When a CPU thread encounters a device exclusive entry it locks the page and restores the original entry after calling mmu notifiers to signal drivers that exclusive

Hi Jérôme, Ben and Jason, below is a series against the hmm tree which fixes up the mmap_sem locking in nouveau and while at it also removes leftover legacy HMM APIs only used by nouveau. The first 4 patches are a bug fix for nouveau, which I suspect should go into this merge window even if the code is marked as staging, just to avoid people copying the breakage. Changes since v2: - new patch

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 01:14:34PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote: > +++ b/mm/memory.c > @@ -3623,8 +3623,19 @@ static vm_fault_t remove_device_exclusive_entry(struct vm_fault *vmf) > struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma; > struct mmu_notifier_range range; > > - if (!folio_lock_or_retry(folio, vma->vm_mm, vmf->flags)) > + /* > + * We need a page reference to

On 3/27/23 19:14, Alistair Popple wrote: > Device exclusive page table entries are used to prevent CPU access to > a page whilst it is being accessed from a device. Typically this is > used to implement atomic operations when the underlying bus does not > support atomic access. When a CPU thread encounters a device exclusive > entry it locks the page and restores the original entry

Without diving in any of the details, your commit message has me curious and concerned... In a "manager" kind of way, despite being neither a manager nor an insider or active contributor. ;-) On 24/01/2020 14:30, Christian K?nig wrote: > From: Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> > > While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru

On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 at 00:30, Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> > > While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by > Nouveau is actually not working at all. > > In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory > management,

Hi guys, I've already send this out in September last year, but only got a response from Daniel. Could you guys please test this and tell me what you think about it? Basically I'm trying to remove all driver specific features from TTM which don't need to be inside the framework. Thanks, Christian.

From: Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by Nouveau is actually not working at all. In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau instead. The patch should be functional correct, but is only compile

While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by Nouveau is actually not working at all. In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau instead. v2: don't call ttm_bo_unmap_virtual in nouveau_ttm_io_mem_reserve v3: rebased and use both base and offset in the check v4:

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 03:12:53PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by > Nouveau is actually not working at all. > > In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory > management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau > instead. > > The patch should be

While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by Nouveau is actually not working at all. In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau instead. The patch should be functional correct, but is only compile tested! Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at