[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d4817192-6db0-2f3f-7c67-6078b69686d3@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:57 -0700
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, <john.hubbard@...il.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: set PG_dma_pinned on get_user_pages*()
On 06/18/2018 01:12 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 01:28:18PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>> Yes. However, my thinking was: get_user_pages() can become a way to indicate that
>> these pages are going to be treated specially. In particular, the caller
>> does not really want or need to support certain file operations, while the
>> page is flagged this way.
>>
>> If necessary, we could add a new API call.
>
> That API call is called get_user_pages_longterm.
OK...I had the impression that this was just semi-temporary API for dax, but
given that it's an exported symbol, I guess it really is here to stay.
Anyway, are you thinking that we could set the new page flag here? Or just pointing
out that the other get_user_pages* variants are the wrong place?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists