[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1233312321.4495.169.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 11:45:21 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frank Mehnert <Frank.Mehnert@....COM>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: PFs on pages pinned with get_user_pages()
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 11:34 +0100, Frank Mehnert wrote:
> > Thing is, lock_page() and down_read() require to be able to schedule(),
> > so there's no way around that.
> >
> > So even if there was another way to disable scheduling, you'd still have
> > the same problem.
>
> Yes, makes sense.
>
> Back to my initial question: The problem arises for us because we depend
> on permanent mappings of memory which were
>
> - allocated with alloc_pages() or alloc_page()
> - mapped into ring 3 with remap_pfn_range() and
> - pinned with get_user_pages()
>
> There are potential pagefaults when touching into these ring-3-mappings
> from ring 0. So I assume we could prevent such pagefaults if we access
> that memory from ring-0-mappings, right? Unfortunately, the space for
> ring-0-mappings (< 1GB) is smaller than userland (~ 3GB), at least on
> 32-bit systems.
if you only need to access one or two pages, you could kmap_atomic() the
actual pages from ring-0.
--
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