On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 09:01:49PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 08:36:43PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> > static inline void copy_to_highpage(struct page *to, void *vfrom, unsigned
> > int size)
> > {
> > char *vto = kmap_atomic(to);
> >
> > memcpy(vto, vfrom, size);
> > kunmap_atomic(vto);
> > }
> >
> > in linux/highmem.h ?
>
> You mean, like
> static void memcpy_from_page(char *to, struct page *page, size_t offset,
> size_t len)
> {
> char *from = kmap_atomic(page);
> memcpy(to, from + offset, len);
> kunmap_atomic(from);
> }
>
> static void memcpy_to_page(struct page *page, size_t offset, const char
> *from, size_t len)
> {
> char *to = kmap_atomic(page);
> memcpy(to + offset, from, len);
> kunmap_atomic(to);
> }
>
> static void memzero_page(struct page *page, size_t offset, size_t len)
> {
> char *addr = kmap_atomic(page);
> memset(addr + offset, 0, len);
> kunmap_atomic(addr);
> }
>
> in lib/iov_iter.c? FWIW, I don't like that "highpage" in the name and
> highmem.h as location - these make perfect sense regardless of highmem;
> they are normal memory operations with page + offset used instead of
> a pointer...
I was thinking along those lines as well especially because of the direction
this patch set takes kmap().
Thanks for pointing these out to me. How about I lift them to a common header?
But if not highmem.h where?
Ira
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
