[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200610092036.50010.ioe-lkml@rameria.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 20:36:47 +0200
From: Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@...eria.de>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: Thomas Hellström
<thomas@...gstengraphics.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: User switchable HW mappings & cie
Hi all,
On Monday, 9. October 2006 13:51, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > One problem that occurs is that the rule for ptes with non-backing
> > struct pages
> > Which I think was introduced in 2.6.16:
> >
> > pfn_of_page == vma->vm_pgoff + ((addr - vma->vm_start) >> PAGE_SHIFT)
> >
> > cannot be honored, at least not with the DRM memory manager, since the
> > graphics object will be associated with a vma and not the underlying
> > physical address. User space will have vma->vm_pgoff as a handle to the
> > object, which may move around in graphics memory.
>
> That's a problem with VM_PFNMAP set indeed. get_user_pages() is a
> non-issue with VM_IO set too but I'm not sure about other code path that
> might try to hit here... though I think we don't hit that if MAP_SHARED,
> Nick ?
Istn't this just a non-linear PFN mapping, you are describing here?
Nick:
Cant your new fault consolidation code handle that?
AFAICS your new .fault handler just gets the
vma and pgoff and install the matching PTE via install_THINGIE()
or vm_insert_THINGIE()
Or do I miss sth. here?
Regards
Ingo Oeser
-
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