From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E4CC10F13 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:57:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59FAB2073F for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:57:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730427AbfDPT5w (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:57:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45206 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730377AbfDPT5u (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:57:50 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6EA7F74CE; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:57:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.20.6.236]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 883AF608C7; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:57:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:57:35 -0400 From: Jerome Glisse To: Boaz Harrosh Cc: Dan Williams , Kent Overstreet , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Linux MM , John Hubbard , Jan Kara , Alexander Viro , Johannes Thumshirn , Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , Ming Lei , Jason Gunthorpe , Matthew Wilcox , Steve French , linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, Yan Zheng , Sage Weil , Ilya Dryomov , Alex Elder , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Van Hensbergen , Latchesar Ionkov , Mike Marshall , Martin Brandenburg , devel@lists.orangefs.org, Dominique Martinet , v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, Coly Li , linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, Ernesto =?iso-8859-1?Q?A=2E_Fern=E1ndez?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/15] Keep track of GUPed pages in fs and block Message-ID: <20190416195735.GE21526@redhat.com> References: <20190411210834.4105-1-jglisse@redhat.com> <2c124cc4-b97e-ee28-2926-305bc6bc74bd@plexistor.com> <20190416185922.GA12818@kmo-pixel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:57:50 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:28:40PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 16/04/19 22:12, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 11:59 AM Kent Overstreet > > wrote: > <> > > This all reminds of the failed attempt to teach the block layer to > > operate without pages: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20150316201640.33102.33761.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com/ > > > > Exactly why I want to make sure it is just a [pointer | flag] and not any kind of pfn > type. Let us please not go there again? > > >> > >> Question though - why do we need a flag for whether a page is a GUP page or not? > >> Couldn't the needed information just be determined by what range the pfn is not > >> (i.e. whether or not it has a struct page associated with it)? > > > > That amounts to a pfn_valid() check which is a bit heavier than if we > > can store a flag in the bv_pfn entry directly. > > > > I'd say create a new PFN_* flag, and make bv_pfn a 'pfn_t' rather than > > an 'unsigned long'. > > > > No, please please not. This is not a pfn and not a pfn_t. It is a page-ptr > and a flag that says where/how to put_page it. IE I did a GUP on this page > please do a PUP on this page instead of regular put_page. So no where do I mean > pfn or pfn_t in this code. Then why? > > > That said, I'm still in favor of Jan's proposal to just make the > > bv_page semantics uniform. Otherwise we're complicating this core > > infrastructure for some yet to be implemented GPU memory management > > capabilities with yet to be determined value. Circle back when that > > value is clear, but in the meantime fix the GUP bug. > > > > I agree there are simpler ways to solve the bugs at hand then > to system wide separate get_user_page from get_page and force all put_user > callers to remember what to do. Is there some Document explaining the > all design of where this is going? > A very long thread on this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/12/3/1128 especialy all the reply to this first one There is also: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/26/1395 https://lwn.net/Articles/753027/ Cheers, Jérôme