[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190527225651.GA18539@mellanox.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 22:56:56 +0000
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
CC: "john.hubbard@...il.com" <john.hubbard@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...el.com>,
Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>,
Christian Benvenuti <benve@...co.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] infiniband/mm: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 04:06:31AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 06:45:22PM -0700, john.hubbard@...il.com wrote:
> > For infiniband code that retains pages via get_user_pages*(),
> > release those pages via the new put_user_page(), or
> > put_user_pages*(), instead of put_page()
>
> I have no objection to this particular patch, but ...
>
> > This is a tiny part of the second step of fixing the problem described
> > in [1]. The steps are:
> >
> > 1) Provide put_user_page*() routines, intended to be used
> > for releasing pages that were pinned via get_user_pages*().
> >
> > 2) Convert all of the call sites for get_user_pages*(), to
> > invoke put_user_page*(), instead of put_page(). This involves dozens of
> > call sites, and will take some time.
> >
> > 3) After (2) is complete, use get_user_pages*() and put_user_page*() to
> > implement tracking of these pages. This tracking will be separate from
> > the existing struct page refcounting.
> >
> > 4) Use the tracking and identification of these pages, to implement
> > special handling (especially in writeback paths) when the pages are
> > backed by a filesystem. Again, [1] provides details as to why that is
> > desirable.
>
> I thought we agreed at LSFMM that the future is a new get_user_bvec()
> / put_user_bvec(). This is largely going to touch the same places as
> step 2 in your list above. Is it worth doing step 2?
I think so, as these two conversions can run in parallel, whichever we
finish first, biovec or put_user_pages lets John progress to step #3
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists