From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9776AFA3741
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Sat, 29 Oct 2022 01:55:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S229695AbiJ2Bzb (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 28 Oct 2022 21:55:31 -0400
Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47240 "EHLO
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S229610AbiJ2Bz2 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 28 Oct 2022 21:55:28 -0400
Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188])
        by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53C7E57BFF
        for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 18:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.56])
        by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4MzjCw6xmTzHvSW;
        Sat, 29 Oct 2022 09:55:08 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.174.151.185] (10.174.151.185) by
 canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.244) with Microsoft SMTP Server
 (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id
 15.1.2375.31; Sat, 29 Oct 2022 09:55:23 +0800
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mm, hwpoison: When copy-on-write hits poison, take
 page offline
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
CC:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Shuai Xue <xueshuai@linux.alibaba.com>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
References: <20221019170835.155381-1-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <20221021200120.175753-1-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <20221021200120.175753-3-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <c5ade8ea-6349-7ade-f245-273de69888a4@huawei.com>
 <SJ1PR11MB608354A1D8817902D7FC9DFAFC329@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From:   Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <4de52973-7590-8ba8-62ca-c78e42f36a63@huawei.com>
Date:   Sat, 29 Oct 2022 09:55:23 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <SJ1PR11MB608354A1D8817902D7FC9DFAFC329@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.174.151.185]
X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.183) To
 canpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.244)
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 2022/10/29 0:13, Luck, Tony wrote:
>>> Cannot call memory_failure() directly from the fault handler because
>>> mmap_lock (and others) are held.
>>
>> Could you please explain which lock makes it unfeasible to call memory_failure() directly and
>> why? I'm somewhat confused. But I agree using memory_failure_queue() should be a good idea.
> 
> I tried calling memory_failure() directly, and my system just hung. I made the assumption
> that it had deadlocked based somewhat on the comments in mm/memory.c about mmap_lock
> being held ... but I didn't dig into what had gone wrong.

I see. Thanks for your explanation. :)

> 
> -Tony
>