lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/3] infiniband/mm: convert to the new put_user_page[s]() calls
On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 09:02:25PM -0700, john.hubbard@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
>
> For code that retains pages via get_user_pages*(),
> release those pages via the new put_user_page(),
> instead of put_page().
>
> This prepares for eventually fixing the problem described
> in [1], and is following a plan listed in [2], [3], [4].
>
> [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/753027/ : "The Trouble with get_user_pages()"
>
> [2] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180709080554.21931-1-jhubbard@nvidia.com
> Proposed steps for fixing get_user_pages() + DMA problems.
>
> [3]https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180710082100.mkdwngdv5kkrcz6n@quack2.suse.cz
> Bounce buffers (otherwise [2] is not really viable).
>
> [4] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181003162115.GG24030@quack2.suse.cz
> Follow-up discussions.
>
> CC: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
> CC: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
> CC: Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@intel.com>
> CC: Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@intel.com>
> CC: Christian Benvenuti <benve@cisco.com>
>
> CC: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
> CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> CC: linux-mm@kvack.org
> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
> drivers/infiniband/core/umem.c | 2 +-
> drivers/infiniband/core/umem_odp.c | 2 +-
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/user_pages.c | 11 ++++-------
> drivers/infiniband/hw/mthca/mthca_memfree.c | 6 +++---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_user_pages.c | 11 ++++-------
> drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_user_sdma.c | 8 ++++----
> drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_uiom.c | 2 +-
> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/umem.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/umem.c
> index a41792dbae1f..9430d697cb9f 100644
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/umem.c
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ static void __ib_umem_release(struct ib_device *dev, struct ib_umem *umem, int d
> page = sg_page(sg);
> if (!PageDirty(page) && umem->writable && dirty)
> set_page_dirty_lock(page);
> - put_page(page);
> + put_user_page(page);
> }

How about ?

if (umem->writable && dirty)
put_user_pages_dirty_lock(&page, 1);
else
put_user_page(page);

?

> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/user_pages.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/user_pages.c
> index e341e6dcc388..99ccc0483711 100644
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/user_pages.c
> @@ -121,13 +121,10 @@ int hfi1_acquire_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long vaddr, size_t np
> void hfi1_release_user_pages(struct mm_struct *mm, struct page **p,
> size_t npages, bool dirty)
> {
> - size_t i;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < npages; i++) {
> - if (dirty)
> - set_page_dirty_lock(p[i]);
> - put_page(p[i]);
> - }
> + if (dirty)
> + put_user_pages_dirty_lock(p, npages);
> + else
> + put_user_pages(p, npages);

And I know Jan gave the feedback to remove the bool argument, but just
pointing out that quite possibly evey caller will wrapper it in an if
like this..

Jason

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-05 17:21    [W:0.174 / U:1.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site