On 8/9/19 11:14 AM, Weiny, Ira wrote:
On Fri 09-08-19 15:58:13, Jan Kara wrote:
On Fri 09-08-19 10:23:07, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Fri 09-08-19 10:12:48, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
...
In principle, I'm not strongly opposed to a new FOLL flag to determine
>
> On 8/8/19 4:41 PM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 03:59:15PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> >> On 8/8/19 12:20 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> >>> On 8/8/19 4:09 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 8/8/19 8:21 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard
> On Fri 09-08-19 15:58:13, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Fri 09-08-19 10:23:07, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Fri 09-08-19 10:12:48, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > > > On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
> > > > >>> That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
> > > > >>> put_user_page()
On Fri 09-08-19 15:58:13, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 09-08-19 10:23:07, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 09-08-19 10:12:48, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > > On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
> > > >>> That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
> > > >>> put_user_page() machinery is
On Fri 09-08-19 10:23:07, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 09-08-19 10:12:48, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
> > >>> That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
> > >>> put_user_page() machinery is intended to be used anyway? These are
> > >>>
On Fri 09-08-19 02:05:15, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 8/9/19 1:23 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 09-08-19 10:12:48, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > > On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
> > > > > > That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
> > > > > > put_user_page() machinery is
On 8/9/19 1:23 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Fri 09-08-19 10:12:48, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
put_user_page() machinery is intended to be used anyway? These are
short-term pins for struct page
On Fri 09-08-19 10:12:48, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
> >>> That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
> >>> put_user_page() machinery is intended to be used anyway? These are
> >>> short-term pins for struct page manipulation, not e.g. dirtying
On 8/9/19 12:59 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> That's true. However, I'm not sure munlocking is where the
>>> put_user_page() machinery is intended to be used anyway? These are
>>> short-term pins for struct page manipulation, not e.g. dirtying of page
>>> contents. Reading commit fc1d8e7cca2d I
On 8/8/19 4:41 PM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 03:59:15PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On 8/8/19 12:20 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> On 8/8/19 4:09 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 8/8/19 8:21 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On
On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 03:59:15PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 8/8/19 12:20 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> > On 8/8/19 4:09 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >> On 8/8/19 8:21 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>> On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 8/7/19 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
On 8/8/19 12:20 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 8/8/19 4:09 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 8/8/19 8:21 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard wrote:
On 8/7/19 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 05-08-19 15:20:17, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From:
On 8/8/19 4:09 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 8/8/19 8:21 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> On 8/7/19 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 05-08-19 15:20:17, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard
>>> Actually, I think
On 8/8/19 8:21 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On 8/7/19 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Mon 05-08-19 15:20:17, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
From: John Hubbard
For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages
On Wed 07-08-19 16:32:08, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 8/7/19 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 05-08-19 15:20:17, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> From: John Hubbard
> >>
> >> For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages
> >> via the new put_user_page*() routines,
On 8/7/19 4:01 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 05-08-19 15:20:17, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: John Hubbard
>>
>> For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages
>> via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or
>> release_pages().
>
> Hmm,
On Mon 05-08-19 15:20:17, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard
>
> For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages
> via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or
> release_pages().
Hmm, this is an interesting code path. There seems to
From: John Hubbard
For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages
via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or
release_pages().
This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d
("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder
18 matches
Mail list logo
