Re: [PATCH v4 0/1] Use HMM for ODP v4

[Jerome Glisse]

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 02:12:31PM -0700, Ralph Campbell wrote:
> 
> On 5/22/19 1:12 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:48:52PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > 
> > >   static void put_per_mm(struct ib_umem_odp *umem_odp)
> > >   {
> > >   	struct ib_ucontext_per_mm *per_mm = umem_odp->per_mm;
> > > @@ -325,9 +283,10 @@ static void put_per_mm(struct ib_umem_odp *umem_odp)
> > >   	up_write(&per_mm->umem_rwsem);
> > >   	WARN_ON(!RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&per_mm->umem_tree.rb_root));
> > > -	mmu_notifier_unregister_no_release(&per_mm->mn, per_mm->mm);
> > > +	hmm_mirror_unregister(&per_mm->mirror);
> > >   	put_pid(per_mm->tgid);
> > > -	mmu_notifier_call_srcu(&per_mm->rcu, free_per_mm);
> > > +
> > > +	kfree(per_mm);
> > 
> > Notice that mmu_notifier only uses SRCU to fence in-progress ops
> > callbacks, so I think hmm internally has the bug that this ODP
> > approach prevents.
> > 
> > hmm should follow the same pattern ODP has and 'kfree_srcu' the hmm
> > struct, use container_of in the mmu_notifier callbacks, and use the
> > otherwise vestigal kref_get_unless_zero() to bail:
> 
> You might also want to look at my patch where
> I try to fix some of these same issues (5/5).
> 
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=155718572908765&w=2

I need to review the patchset but i do not want to invert referencing
ie having mm hold reference on hmm. Will review tommorrow. I wanted to
do that today but did not had time.