On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:53:11PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> In 2019, we introduced pin_user_pages*() and now we are converting
> get_user_pages*() to the new API as appropriate. [1] & [2] could
> be referred for more information.
>
> [1] Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst
>
> [2] "
In 2019, we introduced pin_user_pages*() and now we are converting
get_user_pages*() to the new API as appropriate. [1] & [2] could
be referred for more information.
[1] Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst
[2] "Explicit pinning of user-space pages":
https://lwn.net/Articles/807108/
On 2020-05-29 04:53, Dan Carpenter wrote:
...
What are the runtime implications of this patch? I'm still not clear on
that honestly.
Instead of incrementing each page's refcount by 1 (with get_user_pages()),
pin_user_pages*() will increment by GUP_PIN_COUNTING_BIAS, which is 1024.
That by itse
Anyway, can you resend with the commit message re-written. To me the
information that's most useful is from the lwn article:
"In short, if pages are being pinned for access to the data
contained within those pages, pin_user_pages() should be used. For
cases where the intent is to manip
On 2020-05-29 00:46, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:57:09AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:46 AM Souptick Joarder wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:32:42AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
This
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:57:09AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:46 AM Souptick Joarder
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Dan Carpenter
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:32:42AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > > > This code was usi
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 12:38:20AM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 2020-05-28 23:27, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:46 AM Souptick Joarder
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Dan Carpenter
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:32:42
On 2020-05-28 23:27, Souptick Joarder wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:46 AM Souptick Joarder wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:32:42AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
This code was using get_user_pages_fast(), in a "Case 2" scenario
(DM
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:46 AM Souptick Joarder wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Dan Carpenter
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:32:42AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > > This code was using get_user_pages_fast(), in a "Case 2" scenario
> > > (DMA/RDMA), using the catego
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Dan Carpenter wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:32:42AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > This code was using get_user_pages_fast(), in a "Case 2" scenario
> > (DMA/RDMA), using the categorization from [1]. That means that it's
> > time to convert the get_user_
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:32:42AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> This code was using get_user_pages_fast(), in a "Case 2" scenario
> (DMA/RDMA), using the categorization from [1]. That means that it's
> time to convert the get_user_pages_fast() + put_page() calls to
> pin_user_pages_fast() + unp
This code was using get_user_pages_fast(), in a "Case 2" scenario
(DMA/RDMA), using the categorization from [1]. That means that it's
time to convert the get_user_pages_fast() + put_page() calls to
pin_user_pages_fast() + unpin_user_page() calls.
There is some helpful background in [2]: basically,
12 matches
Mail list logo