[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wicC9ZTNNH1E-oHebcT3+r4Q4Wf1tXBindXrCdotj20Gg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:07:56 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Do we need to unrevert "fs: do not prefault sys_write() user
buffer pages"?
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 11:05 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> Huh? Last I checked, the fault_in_readable actually read a byte from
> the page. It has to wait for the read to complete before that can
> happen.
Yeah, we don't have any kind of async fault-in model.
I'm not sure how that would even look. I don't think it would
necessarily be *impossible* (special marker in the exception table to
let the fault code know that this is a "prepare" fault), but it would
be pretty challenging.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists