linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] iov_iter: new iov_iter_pin

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c100fcd6-60fb-6650-fdac-7cc3a3bbc464@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2022 16:43:57 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
        Anna Schumaker <anna@...nel.org>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] iov_iter: new iov_iter_pin_pages*() routines

On 22.09.22 16:36, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 06:02:11AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
>> nvme target: nvme read requests end up with somebody allocating and filling
>> sglist, followed by reading from file into it (using ITER_BVEC).  Then the
>> pages are sent out, presumably
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> .  I would be very surprised if it turned out
>> to be anything other than anon pages allocated by the driver, but I'd like
>> to see that confirmed by nvme folks.  Probably doesn't need pinning.
> 
> They are anon pages allocated by the driver using sgl_alloc().

I assume they are not anon pages as in "PageAnon()", but simply not 
pagecache pages, correct?

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb