From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751319AbdH1WfO (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:35:14 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:38025 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751190AbdH1WfN (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:35:13 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.41,442,1498546800"; d="scan'208";a="145543104" Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 15:35:11 -0700 From: Andi Kleen To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Peter Zijlstra , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Laurent Dufour , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net, jack@suse.cz, Matthew Wilcox , mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , hpa@zytor.com, Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, Tim Chen , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/20] mm: Provide speculative fault infrastructure Message-ID: <20170828223511.GM28715@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <1503007519-26777-1-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1503007519-26777-15-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170827001823.n5wgkfq36z6snvf2@node.shutemov.name> <20170828093727.5wldedputadanssh@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <1503954877.4850.19.camel@kernel.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1503954877.4850.19.camel@kernel.crashing.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > That makes me extremely nervous... there could be all sort of > assumptions esp. in arch code about the fact that we never populate the > tree without the mm sem. > > We'd have to audit archs closely. Things like the page walk cache > flushing on power etc... Yes the whole thing is quite risky. Probably will need some kind of per architecture opt-in scheme? -Andi