Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] mm/gup: migrate pinned pages out of movable zone

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> Am 12.12.2020 um 00:50 schrieb Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx>:
> 
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:53:00PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> 
>>> When check_and_migrate_movable_pages() is called, the pages are
>>> already pinned. If some of those pages are in movable zone, and we
>>> fail to migrate or isolate them what should we do: proceed, and
>>> keep it as exception of when movable zone can actually have pinned
>>> pages or unpin all pages in the array, and return an error, or
>>> unpin only pages in movable zone, and return an error?
>> 
>> I guess revert what we did (unpin) and return an error. The
>> interesting question is what can make migration/isolation fail
>> 
>> a) out of memory: smells like a zone setup issue. Failures are acceptable I guess.
> 
> Out of memory is reasonable..
> 
>> b) short term pinnings: process dying - not relevant I guess. Other cases? (Fork?)
> 
> Concurrent with non-longterm GUP users are less reasonable, fork is
> not reasonable, etc..

Concurrent alloc_contig_range(), memory offlining, compaction .. where we migrate pages? Any experts on racing page migration in these scenarios?

(Also wondering what would happen if we are just about to swap)

> 
> Racing with another GUP in another thread is also not reasonable, so
> failing to isolate can't be a failure

Having VMs with multiple vfio containers is certainly realistic, and optimizing in user space to do vfio mappings concurrently doesn‘t sound too crazy to me. But I haven‘t checked if vfio common code already handles such concurrency.

> 
> Jasnon
> 





[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux