[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/privcmd: Convert get_user_pages*() to pin_user_pages*()
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:29 PM Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 6/16/20 11:14 PM, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > In 2019, we introduced pin_user_pages*() and now we are converting > > get_user_pages*() to the new API as appropriate. [1] & [2] could > > be referred for more information. > > > > [1] Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst > > > > [2] "Explicit pinning of user-space pages": > > https://lwn.net/Articles/807108/ > > > > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Hi, > > > > I have compile tested this patch but unable to run-time test, > > so any testing help is much appriciated. > > > > Also have a question, why the existing code is not marking the > > pages dirty (since it did FOLL_WRITE) ? > > > Indeed, seems to me it should. Paul? > > > > > > drivers/xen/privcmd.c | 7 ++----- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/privcmd.c b/drivers/xen/privcmd.c > > index a250d11..543739e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/xen/privcmd.c > > +++ b/drivers/xen/privcmd.c > > @@ -594,7 +594,7 @@ static int lock_pages( > > if (requested > nr_pages) > > return -ENOSPC; > > > > - pinned = get_user_pages_fast( > > + pinned = pin_user_pages_fast( > > (unsigned long) kbufs[i].uptr, > > requested, FOLL_WRITE, pages); > > if (pinned < 0) > > @@ -614,10 +614,7 @@ static void unlock_pages(struct page *pages[], > > unsigned int nr_pages) > > if (!pages) > > return; > > > > - for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) { > > - if (pages[i]) > > - put_page(pages[i]); > > - } > > + unpin_user_pages(pages, nr_pages); > > > Why are you no longer checking for valid pages? My understanding is, in case of lock_pages() end up returning partial mapped pages, we should pass no. of partial mapped pages to unlock_pages(), not nr_pages. This will avoid checking extra check to validate the pages[i]. and if lock_pages() returns 0 in success, anyway we have all the pages[i] valid. I will try to correct it in v2. But I agree, there is no harm to check for pages[i] and I believe, unpin_user_pages() is the right place to do so. John any thought ?
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |