On 3/14/19 2:06 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 13-03-19 19:21:37, Christopher Lameter wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:11:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:39:33AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> IMHO I don't think
On 3/14/19 1:25 PM, William Kucharski wrote:
On Mar 14, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
Well I have some crash reports couple years old and they are not from QA
departments. So I'm pretty confident there are real users that use this in
production... and just reboot their machine in case
> On Mar 14, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
>
> Well I have some crash reports couple years old and they are not from QA
> departments. So I'm pretty confident there are real users that use this in
> production... and just reboot their machine in case it crashes.
Do you know what the use
On Thu 14-03-19 09:57:18, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 10:03:45AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Wed 13-03-19 19:16:51, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> > > On Tue, 12 Mar 2019, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > This has been discuss extensively already. GUP usage is now
> >
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 10:03:45AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 13-03-19 19:16:51, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2019, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > > > > This has been discuss extensively already. GUP usage is now
> > > > > widespread in
> > > > > multiple drivers, removing
On Wed 13-03-19 19:21:37, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:11:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:39:33AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > > IMHO I don't think that the copy_file_range() is going
On Wed 13-03-19 19:16:51, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2019, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > > > This has been discuss extensively already. GUP usage is now widespread
> > > > in
> > > > multiple drivers, removing that would regress userspace ie break
> > > > existing
> > > >
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 07:16:51PM +, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2019, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > > > This has been discuss extensively already. GUP usage is now widespread
> > > > in
> > > > multiple drivers, removing that would regress userspace ie break
> > > > existing
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:11:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:39:33AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > IMHO I don't think that the copy_file_range() is going to carry us
> > > through the
> > > next wave of user
On Tue, 12 Mar 2019, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > This has been discuss extensively already. GUP usage is now widespread in
> > > multiple drivers, removing that would regress userspace ie break existing
> > > application. We all know what the rules for that is.
You are still misstating the issue.
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:11:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:39:33AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > IMHO I don't think that the copy_file_range() is going to carry us through
> > the
> > next wave of user performance requirements. RDMA, while the first, is not
> > the
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:11:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:39:33AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > IMHO I don't think that the copy_file_range() is going to carry us through
> > the
> > next wave of user performance requirements. RDMA, while the first, is not
> > the
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:39:33AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> IMHO I don't think that the copy_file_range() is going to carry us through the
> next wave of user performance requirements. RDMA, while the first, is not the
> only technology which is looking to have direct access to files. XDP is
>
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 05:23:21AM +, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2019, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> > > Direct IO on a mmapped file backed page doesnt make any sense.
> >
> > People have used it for many, many years as zero-copy data movement
> > pattern. i.e. mmap the destination
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:35:29AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > > Yes you now have the filesystem as well as the GUP pinner claiming
> > > > authority over the contents of a single memory segment. Maybe better not
> > > > allow that?
> > >
> > > This goes back to regressing existing driver
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 04:52:07AM +, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2019, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > >
> > > It would good if that understanding would be enforced somehow given the
> > > problems
> > > that we see.
> >
> > This has been discuss extensively already. GUP usage is
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Direct IO on a mmapped file backed page doesnt make any sense.
>
> People have used it for many, many years as zero-copy data movement
> pattern. i.e. mmap the destination file, use direct IO to DMA direct
> into the destination file page cache pages,
On Fri, 8 Mar 2019, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> >
> > It would good if that understanding would be enforced somehow given the
> > problems
> > that we see.
>
> This has been discuss extensively already. GUP usage is now widespread in
> multiple drivers, removing that would regress userspace ie break
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 03:08:40AM +, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Direct IO
> > =
> >
> > Direct IO can cause corruption, if userspace does Direct-IO that writes to
> > a range of virtual addresses that are mmap'd to a file. The
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 03:08:40AM +, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> > GUP was first introduced for Direct IO (O_DIRECT), allowing filesystem code
> > to get the struct page behind a virtual address and to let storage hardware
> > perform
On Wed, 6 Mar 2019, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> GUP was first introduced for Direct IO (O_DIRECT), allowing filesystem code
> to get the struct page behind a virtual address and to let storage hardware
> perform a direct copy to or from that page. This is a short-lived access
> pattern, and
On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 03:54:54PM -0800, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard
>
> Hi Andrew and all,
>
> Can we please apply this (destined for 5.2) once the time is right?
> (I see that -mm just got merged into the main tree today.)
>
> We seem to have pretty solid consensus on
From: John Hubbard
Hi Andrew and all,
Can we please apply this (destined for 5.2) once the time is right?
(I see that -mm just got merged into the main tree today.)
We seem to have pretty solid consensus on the concept and details of the
put_user_pages() approach. Or at least, if we don't,
23 matches
Mail list logo
