On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:53:21PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 04:59:29PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 09:46:47AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > @@ -296,11 +223,17 @@ static struct ib_umem *__ib_umem_get(struct
> > > ib_device *device,
> > > goto umem_release;
> > >
> > > cur_base += ret * PAGE_SIZE;
> > > - npages -= ret;
> > > -
> > > - sg = ib_umem_add_sg_table(sg, page_list, ret,
> > > - dma_get_max_seg_size(device->dma_device),
> > > - &umem->sg_nents);
> > > + npages -= ret;
> > > + sg = __sg_alloc_table_from_pages(
> > > + &umem->sg_head, page_list, ret, 0, ret << PAGE_SHIFT,
> > > + dma_get_max_seg_size(device->dma_device), sg, npages,
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + umem->sg_nents = umem->sg_head.nents;
> > > + if (IS_ERR(sg)) {
> > > + unpin_user_pages_dirty_lock(page_list, ret, 0);
> > > + ret = PTR_ERR(sg);
> > > + goto umem_release;
> > > + }
> > > }
> > >
> > > sg_mark_end(sg);
> >
> > Does it still need the sg_mark_end?
>
> It is preserved here for correctness, the release logic doesn't rely on
> this marker, but it is better to leave it.
I mean, my read of __sg_alloc_table_from_pages() is that it already
placed it, the final __alloc_table() does it?
Jason
