From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Cc: john.hubbard@gmail.com,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Alexander Viro" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"Björn Töpel" <bjorn.topel@intel.com>,
"Boaz Harrosh" <boaz@plexistor.com>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Ilya Dryomov" <idryomov@gmail.com>, "Jan Kara" <jack@suse.cz>,
"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca>, "Jens Axboe" <axboe@kernel.dk>,
"Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>,
"Johannes Thumshirn" <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
"Magnus Karlsson" <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>,
"Matthew Wilcox" <willy@infradead.org>,
"Miklos Szeredi" <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
"Ming Lei" <ming.lei@redhat.com>, "Sage Weil" <sage@redhat.com>,
"Santosh Shilimkar" <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com>,
"Yan Zheng" <zyan@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] net/xdp: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 11:06:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190723180612.GB29729@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4e9b293-11f8-6b3c-cf4d-308e3b32df34@nvidia.com>
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 09:41:34PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 7/22/19 5:25 PM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 03:34:15PM -0700, john.hubbard@gmail.com wrote:
> > > From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
> > >
> > > 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 versions").
> > >
> > > Cc: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>
> > > Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> > > Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > > Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
> > > ---
> > > net/xdp/xdp_umem.c | 9 +--------
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/xdp/xdp_umem.c b/net/xdp/xdp_umem.c
> > > index 83de74ca729a..0325a17915de 100644
> > > --- a/net/xdp/xdp_umem.c
> > > +++ b/net/xdp/xdp_umem.c
> > > @@ -166,14 +166,7 @@ void xdp_umem_clear_dev(struct xdp_umem *umem)
> > > static void xdp_umem_unpin_pages(struct xdp_umem *umem)
> > > {
> > > - unsigned int i;
> > > -
> > > - for (i = 0; i < umem->npgs; i++) {
> > > - struct page *page = umem->pgs[i];
> > > -
> > > - set_page_dirty_lock(page);
> > > - put_page(page);
> > > - }
> > > + put_user_pages_dirty_lock(umem->pgs, umem->npgs);
> >
> > What is the difference between this and
> >
> > __put_user_pages(umem->pgs, umem->npgs, PUP_FLAGS_DIRTY_LOCK);
> >
> > ?
>
> No difference.
>
> >
> > I'm a bit concerned with adding another form of the same interface. We should
> > either have 1 call with flags (enum in this case) or multiple calls. Given the
> > previous discussion lets move in the direction of having the enum but don't
> > introduce another caller of the "old" interface.
>
> I disagree that this is a "problem". There is no maintenance pitfall here; there
> are merely two ways to call the put_user_page*() API. Both are correct, and
> neither one will get you into trouble.
>
> Not only that, but there is ample precedent for this approach in other
> kernel APIs.
>
> >
> > So I think on this patch NAK from me.
> >
> > I also don't like having a __* call in the exported interface but there is a
> > __get_user_pages_fast() call so I guess there is precedent. :-/
> >
>
> I thought about this carefully, and looked at other APIs. And I noticed that
> things like __get_user_pages*() are how it's often done:
>
> * The leading underscores are often used for the more elaborate form of the
> call (as oppposed to decorating the core function name with "_flags", for
> example).
>
> * There are often calls in which you can either call the simpler form, or the
> form with flags and additional options, and yes, you'll get the same result.
>
> Obviously, this stuff is all subject to a certain amount of opinion, but I
> think I'm on really solid ground as far as precedent goes. So I'm pushing
> back on the NAK... :)
Fair enough... However, we have discussed in the past how GUP can be a
confusing interface to use.
So I'd like to see it be more directed. Only using the __put_user_pages()
version allows us to ID callers easier through a grep of PUP_FLAGS_DIRTY_LOCK
in addition to directing users to use that interface rather than having to read
the GUP code to figure out that the 2 calls above are equal. It is not a huge
deal but...
Ira
>
> thanks,
> --
> John Hubbard
> NVIDIA
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-23 18:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-22 22:34 [PATCH 0/3] introduce __put_user_pages(), convert a few call sites john.hubbard
2019-07-22 22:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm/gup: introduce __put_user_pages() john.hubbard
2019-07-23 5:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-23 6:33 ` John Hubbard
2019-07-23 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-22 22:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] drivers/gpu/drm/via: convert put_page() to put_user_page*() john.hubbard
2019-07-22 22:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] net/xdp: " john.hubbard
2019-07-23 0:25 ` Ira Weiny
2019-07-23 4:41 ` John Hubbard
2019-07-23 12:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-23 18:06 ` Ira Weiny [this message]
2019-07-23 23:24 ` John Hubbard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190723180612.GB29729@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com \
--to=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bjorn.topel@intel.com \
--cc=boaz@plexistor.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=john.hubbard@gmail.com \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.karlsson@intel.com \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sage@redhat.com \
--cc=santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=zyan@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).