[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1160351174.14601.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 09:46:13 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] mm: fault handler to replace nopage and populate
> - So is the plan here to migrate all code over to using
> vm_operations.fault() and to finally remove vm_operations.nopage and
> .nopfn? If so, that'd be nice.
Agreed. That would also allow to pass down knowledge of wether we can be
interruptible or not (coming from userland or not). Useful in a few case
when dealing with strange hw mappings.
Now, fault() still returns a struct page and thus doesn't quite fix the
problem I'm exposing in my "User switchable HW mappings & cie" mail I
posted today in which case we need to either duplicate the truncate
logic in no_pfn() or get rid of no_pfn() and set the PTE from the fault
handler . I tend to prefer the later provided that it's strictly limited
for mappings that do not have a struct page though.
> - As you know, there is a case for constructing that `struct fault_data'
> all the way up in do_no_page(): so we can pass data back, asking
> do_no_page() to rerun the fault if we dropped mmap_sem.
>
> - No useful opinion on the substance of this patch, sorry. It's Saturday ;)
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@...ck.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists