[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <875206.1674572365@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:59:25 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
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>,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 10/10] mm: Renumber FOLL_PIN and FOLL_GET down
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com> wrote:
> What is the 3rd state?
Consider a network filesystem message generated for a direct I/O that the
network filesystem does zerocopy on. You may have an sk_buff that has
fragments from one or more of three different sources:
(1) Fragments consisting of specifically allocated pages, such as the
IP/UDP/TCP headers that have refs taken on them.
(2) Fragments consisting of zerocopy kernel buffers that has neither refs nor
pins belonging to the sk_buff.
iov_iter_extract_pages() will not take pins when extracting from, say, an
XARRAY-type or KVEC-type iterator. iov_iter_extract_mode() will return
0.
(3) Fragments consisting of zerocopy user buffers that have pins taken on
them belonging to the sk_buff.
iov_iter_extract_pages() will take pins when extracting from, say, a
UBUF-type or IOVEC-type iterator. iov_iter_extract_mode() will return
FOLL_PIN (at the moment).
So you have three states: Ref'd, pinned and no-retention.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists