Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: introduce process_mrelease system call

On Thu 22-07-21 21:47:56, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021, 7:04 PM Shakeel Butt [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 6:14 PM Suren Baghdasaryan [off-list ref]
wrote:

quoted

[...]

quoted

+
+       mmap_read_lock(mm);

How about mmap_read_trylock(mm) and return -EAGAIN on failure?

That sounds like a good idea. Thanks! I'll add that in the next respin.

Why is that a good idea? Can you do anything meaningful about the
failure other than immediately retry the syscall and hope for the best?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 11:20 PM Michal Hocko [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu 22-07-21 21:47:56, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021, 7:04 PM Shakeel Butt [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 6:14 PM Suren Baghdasaryan [off-list ref]
wrote:

quoted

[...]

quoted

+
+       mmap_read_lock(mm);

How about mmap_read_trylock(mm) and return -EAGAIN on failure?

That sounds like a good idea. Thanks! I'll add that in the next respin.

Why is that a good idea? Can you do anything meaningful about the
failure other than immediately retry the syscall and hope for the best?

Yes we can. Based on the situation/impact we can select more victims.