[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b4e15390-701d-c6e9-564c-04e6a3effd50@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 14:20:14 -0700
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
<linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>, <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 15/19] mm/gup: Introduce vaddr_pin_pages()
On 8/12/19 2:00 PM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 05:09:54PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On 8/9/19 3:58 PM, ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
>>> From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
...
>
> At one point I wanted to (and had in my tree) a new flag but I went away from
> it. Prior to the discussion on mlock last week I did not think we needed it.
> But I'm ok to add it back in.
>
> I was not ignoring the idea for this RFC I just wanted to get this out there
> for people to see. I see that you threw out a couple of patches which add this
> flag in.
>
> FWIW, I think it would be good to differentiate between an indefinite pinned
> page vs a referenced "gotten" page.
>
> What you and I have been working on is the former. So it would be easy to
> change your refcounting patches to simply key off of FOLL_PIN.
>
> Would you like me to add in your FOLL_PIN patches to this series?
Sure, that would be perfect. They don't make any sense on their own, and
it's all part of the same design idea.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
Powered by blists - more mailing lists