On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 05:47:51PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:21:37PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:58:20PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > > I need a struct to link part of device context with mm struct for a
> > > process. Most of device
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:21:37PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:58:20PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > I need a struct to link part of device context with mm struct for a
> > process. Most of device context is link to the struct file of the
> > device file (ie process
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:58:20PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> I need a struct to link part of device context with mm struct for a
> process. Most of device context is link to the struct file of the
> device file (ie process open has a file descriptor for the device
> file).
Er... You do
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 09:39:53PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 01:25:13PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:15:02PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:56:37PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > > Well scratch that whole
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 09:33:07PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 01:26:10PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > Basicly i want a callback in __fd_install(), do_dup2(), dup_fd() and
> > add void * *private_data; to struct fdtable (also a default array to
> > struct files_struct).
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:15:02PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> Well like you pointed out what i really want is a 1:1 structure linking
> a device struct an a mm_struct. Given that this need to be cleanup when
> mm goes away hence tying this to mmu_notifier sounds like a better idea.
>
> I am
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 01:25:13PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:15:02PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:56:37PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > Well scratch that whole idea, i would need to add a new array to task
> > > > struct which
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 01:26:10PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> Basicly i want a callback in __fd_install(), do_dup2(), dup_fd() and
> add void * *private_data; to struct fdtable (also a default array to
> struct files_struct). The callback would be part of struct file_operations.
> and only
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:15:02PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:56:37PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > Well scratch that whole idea, i would need to add a new array to task
> > > struct which make it a lot less appealing. Hence a better solution is
> > > to instead
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:56:37PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:31:08PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > > Basicly i want a callback in __fd_install(), do_dup2(), dup_fd() and
> > > > add void * *private_data; to struct fdtable (also a default array to
> > > > struct
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:31:08PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > Basicly i want a callback in __fd_install(), do_dup2(), dup_fd() and
> > > add void * *private_data; to struct fdtable (also a default array to
> > > struct files_struct). The callback would be part of struct
> > >
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:31:07PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 13:26 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:58:39PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 12:30 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:43:56AM -0700,
On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 13:26 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:58:39PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 12:30 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:43:56AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:38:25AM -0400,
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:58:39PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 12:30 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:43:56AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:38:25AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > > Oh can i get one more small slot
On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 12:30 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:43:56AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:38:25AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > Oh can i get one more small slot for fs ? I want to ask if they are
> > > any people against having a
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:43:56AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:38:25AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > Oh can i get one more small slot for fs ? I want to ask if they are
> > any people against having a callback everytime a struct file is added
> > to a task_struct
Chris,
>> I'd like to propose that we compact the fs sessions so that we get a
>> 3-slot session reserved for "Individual filesystem discussions" one
>> afternoon. That way we've got time in the schedule for the all the
>> ext4/btrfs/XFS/NFS/CIFS devs to get together with each other and
>> talk
On 18 Apr 2018, at 21:55, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:19:39PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> Just wanted to suggest to push HMM status down one slot in the
>> agenda to avoid having FS and MM first going into their own
>> room and then merging back for GUP and DAX, and
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:38:25AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> Oh can i get one more small slot for fs ? I want to ask if they are
> any people against having a callback everytime a struct file is added
> to a task_struct and also having a secondary array so that special
> file like device file
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:55:08AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:19:39PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > Just wanted to suggest to push HMM status down one slot in the
> > agenda to avoid having FS and MM first going into their own
> > room and then merging back for GUP
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:19:39PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> Just wanted to suggest to push HMM status down one slot in the
> agenda to avoid having FS and MM first going into their own
> room and then merging back for GUP and DAX, and re-splitting
> after. More over HMM and NUMA talks will be
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:19:39PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> Just wanted to suggest to push HMM status down one slot in the
> agenda to avoid having FS and MM first going into their own
> room and then merging back for GUP and DAX, and re-splitting
> after. More over HMM and NUMA talks will be
22 matches
Mail list logo
