[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210309210036.GJ763132@xz-x1>
Date:   Tue, 9 Mar 2021 16:00:36 -0500
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        "Zengtao (B)" <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Giovanni Cabiddu <giovanni.cabiddu@...el.com>,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@...dia.com>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfio/pci: make the vfio_pci_mmap_fault reentrant
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 01:11:04PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > It's just that the initial MMIO access delay would be spread to the 1st access
> > of each mmio page access rather than using the previous pre-fault scheme.  I
> > think an userspace cares the delay enough should pre-fault all pages anyway,
> > but just raise this up.  Otherwise looks sane.
> 
> Yep, this is a concern.  Is it safe to have loops concurrently and fully
> populating the same vma with vmf_insert_pfn()?
AFAIU it's safe, and probably the (so far) best way for an userspace to quickly
populate a huge chunk of mmap()ed region for either MMIO or RAM.  Indeed from
that pov vmf_insert_pfn() seems to be even more efficient on prefaulting since
it can be threaded.
Thanks,
-- 
Peter Xu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
