[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c742e47b-dcc0-1fef-dc8c-3bf85d26b046@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 14:24:13 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/8] iov_iter: Add a function to extract a page list
from an iterator
On 23.01.23 14:19, David Howells wrote:
> David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> Switching from FOLL_GET to FOLL_PIN was in the works by John H. Not sure what
>> the status is. Interestingly, Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst
>> already documents that "CASE 1: Direct IO (DIO)" uses FOLL_PIN ... which does,
>> unfortunately, no reflect reality yet.
>
> Yeah - I just came across that.
>
> Should iov_iter.c then switch entirely to using pin_user_pages(), rather than
> get_user_pages()? In which case my patches only need keep track of
> pinned/not-pinned and never "got".
That would be the ideal case: whenever intending to access page content,
use FOLL_PIN instead of FOLL_GET.
The issue that John was trying to sort out was that there are plenty of
callsites that do a simple put_page() instead of calling
unpin_user_page(). IIRC, handling that correctly in existing code --
what was pinned must be released via unpin_user_page() -- was the
biggest workitem.
Not sure how that relates to your work here (that's why I was asking):
if you could avoid FOLL_GET, that would be great :)
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists