[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2079ba48-5ae5-5b44-cce1-8175712dd395@deltatee.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 14:45:09 -0700
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, benh@....ibm.com
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Oliver OHalloran <oliveroh@....ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] Copy Offload in NVMe Fabrics with P2P PCI Memory
On 01/03/18 02:37 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> Ah ok, I'd need to look at the details. I had been assuming that
> sparse-vmemmap could handle such a situation, but that could indeed be
> a broken assumption.
It handles it fine for many situations. But when you try to map
something that is at the end of the physical address space then the
spares-vmemmap needs virtual address space that's the size of the
physical address space divided by PAGE_SIZE which may be a little bit
too large...
Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists