On 5/8/24 16:51, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 12:35:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
all these, because e.g. ttm internally does have a page pool because
depending upon allocator, that's indeed beneficial. Other drm drivers have
more buffer-based concepts for
On 5/8/24 16:58, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 04:44:32PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
like a weird and indirect way to get there. Why can't io_uring just be
the entity that does the final free and not mess with the logic
allocator?
Then the user has to do a syscall (e.g.
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 04:44:32PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > like a weird and indirect way to get there. Why can't io_uring just be
> > the entity that does the final free and not mess with the logic
> > allocator?
>
> Then the user has to do a syscall (e.g. via io_uring) to return pages,
On 5/8/24 15:25, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 12:30:07PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
I'm not going to pretend to know about page pool details, but dmabuf
is the way to get the bulk of pages into a pool within the net stack's
allocator and keep that bulk properly refcounted
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 12:35:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 5/8/24 08:16, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:32:47PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:35:37PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > > > On 5/7/24 18:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 12:30:07PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > I'm not going to pretend to know about page pool details, but dmabuf
> > is the way to get the bulk of pages into a pool within the net stack's
> > allocator and keep that bulk properly refcounted while.> An object like
> >
On 5/8/24 08:16, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:32:47PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:35:37PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 5/7/24 18:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 06:25:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 5/7/24 17:48,
On 5/8/24 00:32, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:35:37PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 5/7/24 18:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 06:25:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 5/7/24 17:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:42:05AM -0700,
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:32:47PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:35:37PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > On 5/7/24 18:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 06:25:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > > > On 5/7/24 17:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > >
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:35:37PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 5/7/24 18:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 06:25:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > > On 5/7/24 17:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:42:05AM -0700, Mina Almasry wrote:
> > > >
On 5/7/24 18:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 06:25:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 5/7/24 17:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:42:05AM -0700, Mina Almasry wrote:
1. Align with devmem TCP to use udmabuf for your io_uring memory. I
think in the past
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 06:25:52PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 5/7/24 17:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:42:05AM -0700, Mina Almasry wrote:
> >
> > > 1. Align with devmem TCP to use udmabuf for your io_uring memory. I
> > > think in the past you said it's a uapi
On 5/7/24 18:15, Mina Almasry wrote:
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 9:55 AM Pavel Begunkov wrote:
On 5/7/24 17:23, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 01:18:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 05:05:12PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
even in tree if you give them
On 5/7/24 17:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:42:05AM -0700, Mina Almasry wrote:
1. Align with devmem TCP to use udmabuf for your io_uring memory. I
think in the past you said it's a uapi you don't link but in the face
of this pushback you may want to reconsider.
dmabuf
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 01:48:38PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:42:05AM -0700, Mina Almasry wrote:
>
> > 1. Align with devmem TCP to use udmabuf for your io_uring memory. I
> > think in the past you said it's a uapi you don't link but in the face
> > of this pushback
On 5/7/24 17:42, Mina Almasry wrote:
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 9:24 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 01:18:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 05:05:12PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
even in tree if you give them enough rope, and they should not have
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 9:55 AM Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>
> On 5/7/24 17:23, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 01:18:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 05:05:12PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> even in tree if you give them enough rope, and they
On 5/7/24 17:23, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 01:18:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 05:05:12PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
even in tree if you give them enough rope, and they should not have
that rope when the only sensible options are page/folio
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:42:05AM -0700, Mina Almasry wrote:
> 1. Align with devmem TCP to use udmabuf for your io_uring memory. I
> think in the past you said it's a uapi you don't link but in the face
> of this pushback you may want to reconsider.
dmabuf does not force a uapi, you can acquire
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 9:24 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 01:18:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 05:05:12PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > > > even in tree if you give them enough rope, and they should not have
> > > > that rope when the
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 05:05:12PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> > even in tree if you give them enough rope, and they should not have
> > that rope when the only sensible options are page/folio based kernel
> > memory (incuding large/huge folios) and dmabuf.
>
> I believe there is at least one
On 5/6/24 13:04, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 01:10:44PM -0700, Mina Almasry wrote:
Is the concern still that folks may be able to hook proprietary stuff
into this like you mentioned before[1]?
That is on concern. The other is that people will do stupid stuff
We're not
Sorry for the late reply.
On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 12:55 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Still NAK to creating aⅺbitrary hooks here.
Is the concern still that folks may be able to hook proprietary stuff
into this like you mentioned before[1]?
I don't see how that can be done as currently
From: Jakub Kicinski
The page providers which try to reuse the same pages will
need to hold onto the ref, even if page gets released from
the pool - as in releasing the page from the pp just transfers
the "ownership" reference from pp to the provider, and provider
will wait for other references
24 matches
Mail list logo
