On 17/03/16 09:37, Chris Wilson wrote:
Although the long term future of get_user_pages_locked() itself is
doubtful, the kernel currently recommends:
/* get_user_pages should be phased out in favor of
* get_user_pages_locked|unlocked or get_user_pages_fast. Nothing
* should use get_user_pages because it cannot pass
* FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY to handle_mm_fault.
*/
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c | 14 ++++++++------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
index 54088a4d6498..fa7d8a8b66ef 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
@@ -500,20 +500,22 @@ __i915_gem_userptr_get_pages_worker(struct work_struct
*_work)
pvec = drm_malloc_ab(npages, sizeof(struct page *));
if (pvec != NULL) {
struct mm_struct *mm = obj->userptr.mm->mm;
+ int locked = 1;
down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
while (pinned < npages) {
- ret = get_user_pages(work->task, mm,
- obj->userptr.ptr + pinned *
PAGE_SIZE,
- npages - pinned,
- !obj->userptr.read_only, 0,
- pvec + pinned, NULL);
+ ret = get_user_pages_locked(work->task, mm,
+ obj->userptr.ptr + pinned *
PAGE_SIZE,
+ npages - pinned,
+ !obj->userptr.read_only, 0,
+ pvec + pinned, &locked);
if (ret < 0)
break;
pinned += ret;
}
- up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
+ if (locked)
+ up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
}
mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Is it just cleanup or actually improves some real (as in hit by someone)
scenario?
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
