On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 08:11:57PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > This is awkward. I'd like it if we had a vfree() variant which called > put_page() instead of __free_pages(). I'd like it even more if we > used release_pages() instead of our own loop that called put_page().
Note that we don't need a new vfree variant, we can do this manually if we want, take a look at kernel/dma/remap.c. But I thought this code intentionally doesn't want to do that to avoid locking in the memory for the pages array. Maybe the i915 maintainers can clarify.
