On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 01:37:20PM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote:
> On 2022/6/9 20:49, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > +void iommu_free_pgtbl_pages(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> > > + struct list_head *pages)
> > > +{
> > > + struct page *page, *next;
> > > +
> > > + if (!domain->concurrent_traversal) {
> > > + put_pages_list(pages);
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + list_for_each_entry_safe(page, next, pages, lru) {
> > > + list_del(&page->lru);
> > > + call_rcu(&page->rcu_head, pgtble_page_free_rcu);
> > > + }
> > It seems OK, but I wonder if there is benifit to using
> > put_pages_list() from the rcu callback
>
> The price is that we need to allocate a "struct list_head" and free it
> in the rcu callback as well. Currently the list_head is sitting in the
> stack.
You'd have to use a different struct page layout so that the list_head
was in the struct page and didn't overlap with the rcu_head
Jason
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
