From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qt1-f169.google.com (mail-qt1-f169.google.com [209.85.160.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 021E145DF6C for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 13:49:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.169 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786542578; cv=none; b=M5leukdApQ8tKBmfukfHG7CgnSIaYa5TrDOT+uljzYNfhpnI6c0YAWK//aHfh+9cvRhL9XbZBfySntv+QS9ePi8gNxf+aX+5yv1fOWh6/axYJttEndVuRJJ+0kkh9dtybgrQl248ozBH8TkhyMrqJwNDvelCD7qBg9LjZkh56lA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786542578; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LvwifihpyQl04XWVsmiC/g59oClWiM8qKJQT0nS9CgQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ncRMesJkwAhrlapfywG5l+h2Qm1H4BqRlvKwdyAP01JO8+RcOyfS3yyDh4rZPOhTBKas9jm4Vl6HPyuD1ZVGac+fRYL3Nf1LSq/9a4yOo+lLbheTiAYUkqzvEC84qmqUVIfsQM3udor7ox0IBW5bf2UKAZQtKgbIVDvctLwv7ak= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ziepe.ca; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ziepe.ca; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ziepe.ca header.i=@ziepe.ca header.b=HoEfNc5l; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.169 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ziepe.ca Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ziepe.ca Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ziepe.ca header.i=@ziepe.ca header.b="HoEfNc5l" Received: by mail-qt1-f169.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-527e352a167so4624661cf.1 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 06:49:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ziepe.ca; s=google; t=1786542576; x=1787147376; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=kc4Afb6aXWQXjmXmnDB66MIWvaDryZWAnPWngJIIDAE=; b=HoEfNc5lyU/Ll7hN0GPE+9hljvoua4Qpye46SRrlgLYSsFB08P74Cw+HiY95R/9SKR KrjVHI6m6PmEeRl/FWnaPIF2smRTxGXu9Jt7rKg3FIx+sOfPF2ij88BPp9JzB73C1g82 fI452m4cyK7obORK07nYNN8pedDlhZa7vvaEXF+bY+pvg0vyK/qR/6PlTH8ikXeK2XRR XJRCIiMVfeY48NSOJlzxjHvMxFmUJLZsnksLcS7Se52daZBJ2VCfSyLNS5Dj7GMXfp6e +mAuhqq0FTddib/3Wb6/F7Jdql6e7XWizRh+RzqIOsPRK9aCmpYPbQCTXJ9BLnoLI7xI rlAg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1786542576; x=1787147376; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=kc4Afb6aXWQXjmXmnDB66MIWvaDryZWAnPWngJIIDAE=; b=T7VUPsGT05KthRKaeXJJ5e1rocnDm78VoGjLsbddSab0UOMOEy2vqZplE9ZJUQAMlo jNLGrYDpWbo+IyMy+D+UEYL7fOOUuwhK2NMv5PrJRENnyZIqBdhX2vTQg/ws7ocKoOsf VXlggua1XCIua3wUMvyyfjv5kgkF033+dWVoiTada7dAYhLhG6M1sXhjumSdDrqXlela tquNRwQQc1+FZswShvGWQ36uyQGsxp2wYLHo7Dngllid2Z6rwo/bGP9rh5kcZkSsndQI udnx49GvYqnNy+LnyW6XO6llG0IG6kPkbR6Y2X3oUnEJsMpmSFwvlWd+Ig4grlldvpqU OebA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RojIEXu9jOYEuNw1LHU8mkyDCuWOjWvQ9DB3ywWyDQM1Olbnt7XUGGGGAnSLc+35G9xCWak1KNHq8QBfkY=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyrPgUzKqfz+JNVbOVW3gLdjdfbQVJOUsQ662sLiAKzplH7vsUF 3EQM4hTFF351nWHAGx3q//vcOrs7wEf5vJmtrFXZWGbyEvUzuW+BYVL0qGXUK4yYJno= X-Gm-Gg: AR+sD11qGo0dFh9F1rz5FUindiBJAc4pxyMD+tWLG3LFjDhlZqDiY5g9QYyIsHDp2K7 fDNX2PMcPJLzF5xTUe8RomAP6a6EMuI6ns0ONEheBo/VhZCuSMCb1EvDkbN3gnh0iDbGh5yMvCk rCgoDqVW1PqZH+Zl3pXk68vj1w8Y7jYKP/V6Knd6qT6z60we3+p/lQ6oZu3rSensNreNlo7wwsL VAQ8I7sr1PZcxYnyf616RCna7GOWqfrYvKZtsomT+ytzzNIh+DvEPeeuuUwTYKT0dASLfife95l SWmJvDfwvur0oBYp8Y3pluLbO9PmCh/JoEOSxsuId5q1YjTQYcWYaJH3b1UuHSFEUt72ZVl9PeX +8rbRgjiWkHZnczGNonsAzht7E9fRxpz2FlSmbYogWREJcXnDBAjibhE77k2htgK02+ZT+nA1H8 HmLkP2fr/02cOP6Hb4ukeOO7G3JrcWhXw03N3g/Q== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7f47:0:b0:516:dbf6:f8e7 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-52d646fa46bmr42007131cf.17.1786542575667; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 06:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ziepe.ca ([142.166.156.215]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d75a77b69052e-52d61c0821esm18333021cf.4.2026.08.12.06.49.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 12 Aug 2026 06:49:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jgg by wakko with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1wu9Ko-000000033xl-0724; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:49:34 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:49:34 -0300 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: David Woodhouse Cc: Michal Hocko , Steven Rostedt , Andrew Morton , David Hildenbrand , Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R. Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Clark Williams , Simona Vetter , =?utf-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWU=?= Glisse , Christian =?utf-8?B?S8O2bmln?= , "Paul E. McKenney" , Sean Christopherson , Paolo Bonzini , linux-mm@kvack.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mmu_notifier: Remove non_block_start/end() from notifier invocation Message-ID: <20260812134934.GC662699@ziepe.ca> References: <20260811135537.GC544626@ziepe.ca> <1d669aca4ffee797b9c29215382444a5b23624b3.camel@infradead.org> <20260811142730.GG544626@ziepe.ca> <20260811104229.72fdd928@gandalf.local.home> <37b83b429b9f14ea6ad4ca1c13cc8e565ec09033.camel@infradead.org> <44c51ace9b0dc44b795f6f48c91cda440eed910b.camel@infradead.org> <20260812122759.GA662699@ziepe.ca> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 02:46:08PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > I hear you. I'm less sceptical, given the use case, but I'll certainly > concede that the universe is known for inventing better idiots. > > I'm certainly not averse to having a wrapper so that the read sections > don't just srcu_read_lock() directly, but also get a sanity check > (non_block_start? local_irq_save? what would it actually be? does it > have to be different for the hardirq vs. process-context invocations?) > for free. > > Or instead of a GPC-specific wrapper, do we make it a first-class SRCU > citizen, SRCU_READ_FLAVOR_ATOMIC? If it disables preemption, we'd know > that lock+unlock must happen on the *same* CPU, which could potentially > simplify my new try_synchronize_srcu() and/or allow for a *spinning* > grace period if we really do want that (although I'm unconvinced; it's > *latency* we care about here, and punting to the WQ when we *already* > have to wait is fair enough). These all seem like good ideas, then you don't need to touch the notifiers.. Jason